Distinct roles of frontal and rear cell-substrate adhesions in fibroblast migration.

Cell migration involves complex physical and chemical interactions with the substrate. To probe the mechanical interactions under different regions of migrating 3T3 fibroblasts, we have disrupted cell-substrate adhesions by local application of the GRGDTP peptide, while imaging stress distribution on the substrate with traction force microscopy. Both spontaneous and GRGDTP-induced detachment of the trailing edge caused extensive cell shortening, without changing the overall level of traction forces or the direction of migration. In contrast, disruption of frontal adhesions caused dramatic, global loss of traction forces before any significant shortening of the cell. Although traction forces and cell migration recovered within 10-20 min of transient frontal treatment, persistent treatment with GRGDTP caused the cell to develop traction forces elsewhere and reorient toward a new direction. We conclude that contractile forces of a fibroblast are transmitted to the substrate through two distinct types of adhesions. Leading edge adhesions are unique in their ability to transmit active propulsive forces. Their functions cannot be transferred directly to existing adhesions upon detachment. Trailing end adhesions create passive resistance during cell migration and readily redistribute their loads upon detachment. Our results indicate the distinct nature of mechanical interactions at the leading versus trailing edges, which together generate the mechanical interactions for fibroblast migration.

[1]  M. Abercrombie,et al.  The locomotion of fibroblasts in culture. II. "RRuffling". , 1970, Experimental cell research.

[2]  A. Harris,et al.  Silicone rubber substrata: a new wrinkle in the study of cell locomotion. , 1980, Science.

[3]  W. T. Chen Surface changes during retraction-induced spreading of fibroblasts. , 1981, Journal of cell science.

[4]  E Ruoslahti,et al.  Platelet membrane glycoprotein IIb/IIIa: member of a family of Arg-Gly-Asp--specific adhesion receptors. , 1986, Science.

[5]  S. Dedhar,et al.  A cell surface receptor complex for collagen type I recognizes the Arg- Gly-Asp sequence , 1987, The Journal of cell biology.

[6]  E. Ruoslahti,et al.  Inhibition of in vitro tumor cell invasion by Arg-Gly-Asp-containing synthetic peptides [published erratum appears in J Cell Biol 1989 Jun;108(6):following 2546] , 1988, The Journal of cell biology.

[7]  Y. Wang,et al.  Formation and movement of myosin-containing structures in living fibroblasts , 1989, The Journal of cell biology.

[8]  Dennis Bray,et al.  Cell Movements: From Molecules to Motility , 1992 .

[9]  M. Radmacher,et al.  From molecules to cells: imaging soft samples with the atomic force microscope. , 1992, Science.

[10]  G. Borisy,et al.  Non-sarcomeric mode of myosin II organization in the fibroblast lamellum , 1993, The Journal of cell biology.

[11]  Kenneth M. Yamada,et al.  Integrin transmembrane signaling and cytoskeletal control. , 1995, Current opinion in cell biology.

[12]  K. Jacobson,et al.  Imaging the traction stresses exerted by locomoting cells with the elastic substratum method. , 1996, Biophysical journal.

[13]  D. Lauffenburger,et al.  Cell Migration: A Physically Integrated Molecular Process , 1996, Cell.

[14]  Gary G. Borisy,et al.  Analysis of the Actin–Myosin II System in Fish Epidermal Keratocytes: Mechanism of Cell Body Translocation , 1997, The Journal of cell biology.

[15]  M. Sheetz,et al.  A micromachined device provides a new bend on fibroblast traction forces. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  K. Jacobson,et al.  Integrin involvement in keratocyte locomotion. , 1998, Cell motility and the cytoskeleton.

[17]  M. Sheetz,et al.  Cell migration: regulation of force on extracellular-matrix-integrin complexes. , 1998, Trends in cell biology.

[18]  Y. Wang,et al.  Preparation of a flexible, porous polyacrylamide substrate for mechanical studies of cultured cells. , 1998, Methods in enzymology.

[19]  M. Dembo,et al.  Stresses at the cell-to-substrate interface during locomotion of fibroblasts. , 1999, Biophysical journal.

[20]  E. Elson,et al.  Forces in cell locomotion. , 1999, Biochemical Society symposium.

[21]  J. Parsons,et al.  Cell Migration--Movin' On , 1999, Science.

[22]  Micah Dembo,et al.  Separation of Propulsive and Adhesive Traction Stresses in Locomoting Keratocytes , 1999, The Journal of cell biology.

[23]  T. Svitkina,et al.  Progress in protrusion: the tell-tale scar. , 1999, Trends in biochemical sciences.

[24]  Y. Wang,et al.  High resolution detection of mechanical forces exerted by locomoting fibroblasts on the substrate. , 1999, Molecular biology of the cell.

[25]  D. Taylor,et al.  Keratocytes generate traction forces in two phases. , 1999, Molecular biology of the cell.

[26]  M. Dembo,et al.  Cell movement is guided by the rigidity of the substrate. , 2000, Biophysical journal.

[27]  K. Beningo,et al.  Nascent Focal Adhesions Are Responsible for the Generation of Strong Propulsive Forces in Migrating Fibroblasts , 2001, The Journal of cell biology.

[28]  Yu-Li Wang,et al.  Distinct roles of the equatorial and polar cortices in the cleavage of adherent cells , 2001, Current Biology.

[29]  M. Dembo,et al.  Traction force microscopy of migrating normal and H-ras transformed 3T3 fibroblasts. , 2001, Biophysical journal.