Defining cellular diversity at the swine maternal–fetal interface using spatial transcriptomics and organoids
Fig 1
Establishment and validation of swine trophoblast organoids (sTO).
A) Schematic of sTO derivation workflow. Created in BioRender. McCutcheon, C. (2025) https://BioRender.com/ohwh6rx. B) Representative low magnification brightfield image from a single well of sTO. C) High magnification brightfield image of sTO grown in Matrigel. D) Representative Hematoxylin and Eosin staining of a sectioned sTOs. E, F) Immunofluorescence microscopy image of sTO grown in Matrigel stained with E) mKi67 and F) cytokeratin 18. G) Immunofluorescence microscopy image of sTO grown in Matrigel “domes”. Apical marker ZO-1 is in green, DAPI in gray, and Actin in red. H) Immunofluorescence microscopy image of sTOs grown in suspension for 48 hours. Apical marker ZO-1 is in green, DAPI in gray, and Actin in red. I) Representative brightfield image of sTO grown in Matrigel “dome” (right) and suspension (left). J) Bar-plot showing the average summation of RPKM for nine Y-linked genes across 3 individual sTO lines. Black dots indicate replicates. sTO lines are denoted on the x-axis. K) Heatmap of known pig placentae and uterus markers expressed across Uterus, PTr2 cells, sTOs, and term pig placentae. Individual columns indicate replicates. Clustering of columns is performed using hierarchical clustering, which groups columns with similar expressional patterns. The underlying data for this figure can be found at the Gene Expression Omnibus via accession numbers GSM8980984, GSM8980985, GSM8980986, GSM8980987, GSM8980988, GSM8980989, GSM8980990, GSM8980991, GSM9083242, and GSM9083243.