» Articles » PMID: 23931306

Determinants of Maximal Force Transmission in a Motor-clutch Model of Cell Traction in a Compliant Microenvironment

Overview
Journal Biophys J
Publisher Cell Press
Specialty Biophysics
Date 2013 Aug 13
PMID 23931306
Citations 97
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The mechanical stiffness of a cell's environment exerts a strong, but variable, influence on cell behavior and fate. For example, different cell types cultured on compliant substrates have opposite trends of cell migration and traction as a function of substrate stiffness. Here, we describe how a motor-clutch model of cell traction, which exhibits a maximum in traction force with respect to substrate stiffness, may provide a mechanistic basis for understanding how cells are tuned to sense the stiffness of specific microenvironments. We find that the optimal stiffness is generally more sensitive to clutch parameters than to motor parameters, but that single parameter changes are generally only effective over a small range of values. By contrast, dual parameter changes, such as coordinately increasing the numbers of both motors and clutches offer a larger dynamic range for tuning the optimum. The model exhibits distinct regimes: at high substrate stiffness, clutches quickly build force and fail (so-called frictional slippage), whereas at low substrate stiffness, clutches fail spontaneously before the motors can load the substrate appreciably (a second regime of frictional slippage). Between the two extremes, we find the maximum traction force, which occurs when the substrate load-and-fail cycle time equals the expected time for all clutches to bind. At this stiffness, clutches are used to their fullest extent, and motors are therefore resisted to their fullest extent. The analysis suggests that coordinate parameter shifts, such as increasing the numbers of motors and clutches, could underlie tumor progression and collective cell migration.

Citing Articles

Cell migration simulator-based biomarkers for glioblastoma.

Hou J, McMahon M, Jubenville T, Sarkaria J, Chen C, Odde D Neurooncol Adv. 2024; 6(1):vdae184.

PMID: 39605317 PMC: 11600334. DOI: 10.1093/noajnl/vdae184.


Insights gained from computational modeling of YAP/TAZ signaling for cellular mechanotransduction.

Jafarinia H, Khalilimeybodi A, Barrasa-Fano J, Fraley S, Rangamani P, Carlier A NPJ Syst Biol Appl. 2024; 10(1):90.

PMID: 39147782 PMC: 11327324. DOI: 10.1038/s41540-024-00414-9.


Mutual antagonism between CD44 and integrins in glioblastoma cell traction and migration.

Kelly M, Pawlak M, Zhan K, Shamsan G, Gordon W, Odde D APL Bioeng. 2024; 8(3):036102.

PMID: 38957223 PMC: 11219079. DOI: 10.1063/5.0203028.


Confinement induces internal flows in adherent cell aggregates.

Yousafzai M, Amiri S, Sun Z, Pahlavan A, Murrell M J R Soc Interface. 2024; 21(214):20240105.

PMID: 38774959 PMC: 11285874. DOI: 10.1098/rsif.2024.0105.


Glioblastoma Cells Use an Integrin- and CD44-Mediated Motor-Clutch Mode of Migration in Brain Tissue.

Anderson S, Kelly M, Odde D Cell Mol Bioeng. 2024; 17(2):121-135.

PMID: 38737451 PMC: 11082118. DOI: 10.1007/s12195-024-00799-x.


References
1.
Kong F, Garcia A, Mould A, Humphries M, Zhu C . Demonstration of catch bonds between an integrin and its ligand. J Cell Biol. 2009; 185(7):1275-84. PMC: 2712956. DOI: 10.1083/jcb.200810002. View

2.
Hamby D . A review of techniques for parameter sensitivity analysis of environmental models. Environ Monit Assess. 2013; 32(2):135-54. DOI: 10.1007/BF00547132. View

3.
Mogilner A, Oster G . Cell motility driven by actin polymerization. Biophys J. 1996; 71(6):3030-45. PMC: 1233792. DOI: 10.1016/S0006-3495(96)79496-1. View

4.
Ulrich T, de Juan Pardo E, Kumar S . The mechanical rigidity of the extracellular matrix regulates the structure, motility, and proliferation of glioma cells. Cancer Res. 2009; 69(10):4167-74. PMC: 2727355. DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-4859. View

5.
Nemir S, West J . Synthetic materials in the study of cell response to substrate rigidity. Ann Biomed Eng. 2009; 38(1):2-20. DOI: 10.1007/s10439-009-9811-1. View