The consensus mechanics of cultured mammalian cells

Although understanding cells' responses to mechanical stimuli is seen as increasingly important for understanding cell biology, how to best measure, interpret, and model cells' mechanical properties remains unclear. We determine the frequency-dependent shear modulus of cultured mammalian cells by using four different methods, both unique and well established. This approach clarifies the effects of cytoskeletal heterogeneity, ATP-dependent processes, and cell regional variations on the interpretation of such measurements. Our results clearly indicate two qualitatively similar, but distinct, mechanical responses, corresponding to the cortical and intracellular networks, each having an unusual, weak power-law form at low frequency. The two frequency-dependent responses we observe are remarkably similar to those reported for a variety of cultured mammalian cells measured with different techniques, suggesting it is a useful consensus description. Finally, we discuss possible physical explanations for the observed mechanical response.

[1]  D. Ingber,et al.  A Computational Tensegrity Model Predicts Dynamic Rheological Behaviors in Living Cells , 2004, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[2]  D A Weitz,et al.  Two-point microrheology of inhomogeneous soft materials. , 2000, Physical review letters.

[3]  D. Ingber Tensegrity I. Cell structure and hierarchical systems biology , 2003, Journal of Cell Science.

[4]  David A Weitz,et al.  Dealing with mechanics: mechanisms of force transduction in cells. , 2004, Trends in biochemical sciences.

[5]  Paul A. Janmey,et al.  Resemblance of actin-binding protein/actin gels to covalently crosslinked networks , 1990, Nature.

[6]  Levine,et al.  One- and two-particle microrheology , 2000, Physical review letters.

[7]  A. Richert,et al.  The dissipative contribution of myosin II in the cytoskeleton dynamics of myoblasts , 2005, European Biophysics Journal.

[8]  Ning Wang,et al.  Rheology of airway smooth muscle cells is associated with cytoskeletal contractile stress. , 2004, Journal of applied physiology.

[9]  Miroslav Zivkovic,et al.  A finite element model of cell deformation during magnetic bead twisting. , 2002, Journal of applied physiology.

[10]  M. Yamazaki,et al.  Mechanical unfolding of single filamin A (ABP‐280) molecules detected by atomic force microscopy , 2001, FEBS letters.

[11]  D. Grier,et al.  Methods of Digital Video Microscopy for Colloidal Studies , 1996 .

[12]  Mason,et al.  Elasticity of Compressed Emulsions. , 1995, Physical review letters.

[13]  Rheological constitutive equation for a model of soft glassy materials , 1997, cond-mat/9712001.

[14]  H. Winter,et al.  Molecular Weight Dependence of Viscoelasticity of Polycaprolactone Critical Gels , 1992 .

[15]  H. Winter,et al.  Physical gelation of a bacterial thermoplastic elastomer , 1992 .

[16]  D A Weitz,et al.  Prestressed F-actin networks cross-linked by hinged filamins replicate mechanical properties of cells. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[17]  D. Wirtz,et al.  Mechanics of living cells measured by laser tracking microrheology. , 2000, Biophysical journal.

[18]  M Essler,et al.  Rapid stiffening of integrin receptor-actin linkages in endothelial cells stimulated with thrombin: a magnetic bead microrheology study. , 2001, Biophysical journal.

[19]  D. Navajas,et al.  Scaling the microrheology of living cells. , 2001, Physical review letters.

[20]  F. Heslot,et al.  Mechanically controlled DNA extrusion from a palindromic sequence by single molecule micromanipulation. , 2006, Physical review letters.

[21]  Christopher S. Chen,et al.  Cell shape, cytoskeletal tension, and RhoA regulate stem cell lineage commitment. , 2004, Developmental cell.

[22]  A. Palmer,et al.  Diffusing wave spectroscopy microrheology of actin filament networks. , 1999, Biophysical journal.

[23]  M. Sheetz,et al.  Local force and geometry sensing regulate cell functions , 2006, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[24]  J. Simeon,et al.  Creep function of a single living cell. , 2005, Biophysical journal.

[25]  Ben Fabry,et al.  Microrheology of human lung epithelial cells measured by atomic force microscopy. , 2003, Biophysical journal.

[26]  Thomas G. Mason,et al.  Estimating the viscoelastic moduli of complex fluids using the generalized Stokes–Einstein equation , 2000 .

[27]  Martin Aepfelbacher,et al.  Microviscoelasticity of the apical cell surface of human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVEC) within confluent monolayers. , 2004, Biophysical journal.

[28]  Adam J. Engler,et al.  Myotubes differentiate optimally on substrates with tissue-like stiffness , 2004, The Journal of cell biology.

[29]  S. Kuo,et al.  Dictyostelium myosin II mechanochemistry promotes active behavior of the cortex on long time scales , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[30]  D. Weitz,et al.  Elastic Behavior of Cross-Linked and Bundled Actin Networks , 2004, Science.

[31]  T C Lubensky,et al.  Microrheology, stress fluctuations, and active behavior of living cells. , 2003, Physical review letters.

[32]  J. Fredberg,et al.  Linearity and time-scale invariance of the creep function in living cells , 2004, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[33]  C. Tanford Macromolecules , 1994, Nature.

[34]  D H Wachsstock,et al.  Cross-linker dynamics determine the mechanical properties of actin gels. , 1994, Biophysical journal.

[35]  E. Sackmann,et al.  Measurement of local viscoelasticity and forces in living cells by magnetic tweezers. , 1999, Biophysical journal.

[36]  M. Rief,et al.  Single molecule force spectroscopy of spectrin repeats: low unfolding forces in helix bundles. , 1999, Journal of molecular biology.

[37]  Matthew J. Paszek,et al.  The Tension Mounts: Mechanics Meets Morphogenesis and Malignancy , 2004, Journal of Mammary Gland Biology and Neoplasia.