Cell-Generated Forces in Tissue Assembly, Function, and Disease

  • John Huynh
  • Joseph P. Califano
  • Cynthia A. Reinhart-King
Chapter

Abstract

While the cell and tissue-level effects of exogenous, physiological forces like shear stress and pressure are well-documented, the effects of endogenous cell-generated forces and the mechanics of the microenvironment have only recently gained significant attention. There is now mounting evidence that cells generate contractile forces that can elicit changes in the balance between cell-cell cohesion and cell-matrix adhesion within tissues. This balance is critical in governing tissue structure, formation and health. These cell-generated traction forces are altered by changes in the mechanics of the cellular microenvironment. Notably, changes in tissue stiffness accompany both the progression of many diseases including atherosclerosis, heart disease and cancer, and in normal physiological processes including development. Recent evidence suggests that the mechanics of the microenvironment may play a role in dictating cell function and tissue structure. Additionally, abnormal changes in tissue stiffness may promote disease progression. This chapter will discuss the role of cell-mediated forces and the mechanics of the microenvironment in the assembly and maintenance of cells into tissues. Recent advances in tools, techniques, and materials used to study cellular forces and the effects of matrix mechanics will be described. Additionally, the role of cellular traction forces and matrix mechanics in both normal and diseased states will be described, using examples primarily from the cardiovascular system to illustrate the relationship between mechanics and cell and tissue function.

Keywords

Permeability Porosity Migration Polyethylene Glycol 

References

  1. 1.
    Steinberg MS (1962) Mechanism of tissue reconstruction by dissociated cells. II. Time-course of events. Science 137:762–763Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Steinberg MS (1962) On the mechanism of tissue reconstruction by dissociated cells, Iii. Free energy relations and the reorganization of fused, heteronomic tissue fragments. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 48:1769–1776Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Steinberg MS (1962) On the mechanism of tissue reconstruction by dissociated cells. I. Population kinetics, differential adhesiveness and the absence of directed migration. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 48:1577–1582Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Steinberg MS (1970) Does differential adhesion govern self-assembly processes in histogenesis? Equilibrium configurations and the emergence of a hierarchy among populations of embryonic cells. J Exp Zool 173:395–433Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Steinberg MS and Garrod DR (1975) Observations on the sorting-out of embryonic cells in monolayer culture. J Cell Sci 18:385–403Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Inoue T, Tanaka T, Takeichi M, et al (2001) Role of cadherins in maintaining the compartment boundary between the cortex and striatum during development. Development 128:561–569Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jia D, Dajusta D, and Foty RA (2007) Tissue surface tensions guide in vitro self-assembly of rodent pancreatic islet cells. Dev Dyn 236:2039–2049Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ryan PL, Foty RA, Kohn J, et al (2001) Tissue spreading on implantable substrates is a competitive outcome of cell-cell vs. cell-substratum adhesivity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 98:4323–4327Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Foty RA, Forgacs G, Pfleger CM, et al (1994) Liquid properties of embryonic tissues: measurement of interfacial tensions. Phys Rev Lett 72:2298–2301Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Foty RA and Steinberg MS (2005) The differential adhesion hypothesis: a direct evaluation. Dev Biol 278:255–263Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shi Q, Chien YH, and Leckband D (2008) Biophysical properties of cadherin bonds do not predict cell sorting. J Biol Chem 283:28454–28463Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Krieg M, Arboleda-Estudillo Y, Puech PH, et al (2008) Tensile forces govern germ-layer organization in zebrafish. Nat Cell Biol 10:429–436Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Harris AK (1976) Is cell sorting caused by differences in the work of intercellular adhesion? A critique of the Steinberg hypothesis. J Theor Biol 61:267–285Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Brodland GW and Chen HH (2000) The mechanics of heterotypic cell aggregates: insights from computer simulations. J Biomech Eng 122:402–407Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Powers MJ, Rodriguez RE, and Griffith LG (1997) Cell-substratum adhesion strength as a determinant of hepatocyte aggregate morphology. Biotechnol Bioeng 53:415–426Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Powers MJ and Griffith LG (1998) Adhesion-guided in vitro morphogenesis in pure and mixed cell cultures. Microsc Res Tech 43:379–384Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Young TH, Tu HR, Chan CC, et al (2009) The enhancement of dermal papilla cell aggregation by extracellular matrix proteins through effects on cell-substratum adhesivity and cell motility. Biomaterials 30:5031–5040Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ingber DE and Folkman J (1989) Mechanochemical switching between growth and differentiation during fibroblast growth factor-stimulated angiogenesis in vitro: role of extracellular matrix. J Cell Biol 109:317–330Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Califano JP and Reinhart-King CA (2008) A balance of substrate mechanics and matrix chemistry regulates endothelial cell network assembly. Cell Mol Bioeng 1:122–132Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rosines E, Schmidt HJ, and Nigam SK (2007) The effect of hyaluronic acid size and concentration on branching morphogenesis and tubule differentiation in developing kidney culture systems: potential applications to engineering of renal tissues. Biomaterials 28:4806–4817Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Genes NG, Rowley JA, Mooney DJ, et al (2004) Effect of substrate mechanics on chondrocyte adhesion to modified alginate surfaces. Arch Biochem Biophys 422:161–167Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Engler A, Bacakova L, Newman C, et al (2004) Substrate compliance versus ligand density in cell on gel responses. Biophys J 86:617–628Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ghibaudo M, Saez A, Trichet L, et al (2008) Traction forces and rigidity sensing regulate cell functions. Soft Matter 4:1836–1843Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yeung T, Georges PC, Flanagan LA, et al (2005) Effects of substrate stiffness on cell morphology, cytoskeletal structure, and adhesion. Cell Motil Cytoskeleton 60:24–34Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pelham RJ, Jr. and Wang Y (1997) Cell locomotion and focal adhesions are regulated by substrate flexibility. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 94:13661–13665Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Califano JP and Reinhart-King CA (2010) Exogenous and endogenous force regulation of endothelial cell behavior. J Biomech 43:79–86Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Reinhart-King CA, Fujiwara K, and Berk BC (2008) Physiologic stress-mediated signaling in the endothelium. Meth Enzymol 443:25–44Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kuzuya M, Satake S, Miura H, et al (1996) Inhibition of endothelial cell differentiation on a glycosylated reconstituted basement membrane complex. Exp Cell Res 226:336–345Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Deroanne CF, Lapiere CM, and Nusgens BV (2001) In vitro tubulogenesis of endothelial cells by relaxation of the coupling extracellular matrix-cytoskeleton. Cardiovas Res 49:647–658Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Stephanou A, Meskaoui G, Vailhe B, et al (2007) The rigidity in fibrin gels as a contributing factor to the dynamics of in vitro vascular cord formation. Microvasc Res 73:182–190Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Nehls V and Herrmann R (1996) The configuration of fibrin clots determines capillary morphogenesis and endothelial cell migration. Microvasc Res 51:347–364Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Vailhe B, Ronot X, Tracqui P, et al (1997) In vitro angiogenesis is modulated by the mechanical properties of fibrin gels and is related to alpha(v)beta3 integrin localization. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Anim 33:763–773Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sieminski AL, Hebbel RP, and Gooch KJ (2004) The relative magnitudes of endothelial force generation and matrix stiffness modulate capillary morphogenesis in vitro. Exp Cell Res 297:574–584Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Krishnan L, Hoying JB, Nguyen H, et al (2007) Interaction of angiogenic microvessels with the extracellular matrix. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 293:H3650–H3658Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Mammoto A, Connor KM, Mammoto T, et al (2009) A mechanosensitive transcriptional mechanism that controls angiogenesis. Nature 457:1103–1108Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Guo WH, Frey MT, Burnham NA, et al (2006) Substrate rigidity regulates the formation and maintenance of tissues. Biophys J 90:2213–2220Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Jakab K, Neagu A, Mironov V, et al (2004) Engineering biological structures of prescribed shape using self-assembling multicellular systems. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 101:2864–2869Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Gehler S, Baldassarre M, Lad Y, et al (2009) Filamin A-beta1 integrin complex tunes epithelial cell response to matrix tension. Mol Biol Cell 20:3224–3238Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Reinhart-King CA, Dembo M, and Hammer DA (2008) Cell-cell mechanical communication through compliant substrates. Biophys J 95:6044–6051Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Namy P, Ohayon J, and Tracqui P (2004) Critical conditions for pattern formation and in vitro tubulogenesis driven by cellular traction fields. J Theor Biol 227:103–120MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wozniak MA and Chen CS (2009) Mechanotransduction in development: a growing role for contractility. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 10:34–43Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Shraiman BI (2005) Mechanical feedback as a possible regulator of tissue growth. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102:3318–3323Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Adams DS, Keller R, and Koehl MA (1990) The mechanics of notochord elongation, straightening and stiffening in the embryo of Xenopus laevis. Development 110:115–130Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Engler AJ, Sen S, Sweeney HL, et al (2006) Matrix elasticity directs stem cell lineage specification. Cell 126:677–689Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Evans ND, Minelli C, Gentleman E, et al (2009) Substrate stiffness affects early differentiation events in embryonic stem cells. Eur Cell Mater 18:1–13; discussion 13–14Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Pajerowski JD, Dahl KN, Zhong FL, et al (2007) Physical plasticity of the nucleus in stem cell differentiation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104:15619–15624Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Chowdhury F, Na S, Li D, et al (2010) Material properties of the cell dictate stress-induced spreading and differentiation in embryonic stem cells. Nat Mater 9:82–88Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Sordella R, Jiang W, Chen GC, et al (2003) Modulation of Rho GTPase signaling regulates a switch between adipogenesis and myogenesis. Cell 113:147–158Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    McBeath R, Pirone DM, Nelson CM, et al (2004) Cell shape, cytoskeletal tension, and RhoA regulate stem cell lineage commitment. Dev Cell 6:483–495Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Moore KA, Polte T, Huang S, et al (2005) Control of basement membrane remodeling and epithelial branching morphogenesis in embryonic lung by Rho and cytoskeletal tension. Dev Dyn 232:268–281Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Nishimura T and Takeichi M (2009) Remodeling of the adherens junctions during morphogenesis. Curr Top Dev Biol 89:33–54Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Delon I and Brown NH (2007) Integrins and the actin cytoskeleton. Curr Opin Cell Biol 19:43–50Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Zaidel-Bar R, Itzkovitz S, Ma’ayan A, et al (2007) Functional atlas of the integrin adhesome. Nat Cell Biol 9:858–867Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Zaidel-Bar R and Geiger B (2010) The switchable integrin adhesome. J Cell Sci 123:1385–1388Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Ogita H and Takai Y (2008) Cross-talk among integrin, cadherin, and growth factor receptor: roles of nectin and nectin-like molecule. Int Rev Cytol 265:1–54Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Schwartz MA and DeSimone DW (2008) Cell adhesion receptors in mechanotransduction. Curr Opin Cell Biol 20:551–556Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Kumar S, Maxwell IZ, Heisterkamp A, et al (2006) Viscoelastic retraction of single living stress fibers and its impact on cell shape, cytoskeletal organization, and extracellular matrix mechanics. Biophys J 90:3762–3773Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Chicurel ME, Chen CS, and Ingber DE (1998) Cellular control lies in the balance of forces. Curr Opin Cell Biol 10:232–239Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Maniotis AJ, Chen CS, and Ingber DE (1997) Demonstration of mechanical connections between integrins, cytoskeletal filaments, and nucleoplasm that stabilize nuclear structure. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 94:849–854Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Katsumi A, Orr AW, Tzima E, et al (2004) Integrins in mechanotransduction. J Biol Chem 279:12001–12004Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Chen CS (2008) Mechanotransduction – a field pulling together? J Cell Sci 121:3285–3292Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Orr AW, Helmke BP, Blackman BR, et al (2006) Mechanisms of mechanotransduction. Dev Cell 10:11–20Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Discher DE, Janmey P, and Wang YL (2005) Tissue cells feel and respond to the stiffness of their substrate. Science 310:1139–1143Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Vogel V and Sheetz M (2006) Local force and geometry sensing regulate cell functions. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 7:265–275Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Oliver T, Jacobson K, and Dembo M (1998) Design and use of substrata to measure traction forces exerted by cultured cells. Meth Enzymol 298:497–521Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Harris AK, Wild P, and Stopak D (1980) Silicone rubber substrata: a new wrinkle in the study of cell locomotion. Science 208:177–179Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Lee J, Leonard M, Oliver T, et al (1994) Traction forces generated by locomoting keratocytes. J Cell Biol 127:1957–1964Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Dembo M, Oliver T, Ishihara A, et al (1996) Imaging the traction stresses exerted by locomoting cells with the elastic substratum method. Biophys J 70:2008–2022Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Marganski WA, Dembo M, and Wang YL (2003) Measurements of cell-generated deformations on flexible substrata using correlation-based optical flow. Meth Enzymol 361:197–211Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Dembo M and Wang YL (1999) Stresses at the cell-to-substrate interface during locomotion of fibroblasts. Biophys J 76:2307–2316Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Sabass B, Gardel ML, Waterman CM, et al (2008) High resolution traction force microscopy based on experimental and computational advances. Biophys J 94:207–220Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Del Alamo JC, Meili R, Alonso-Latorre B, et al (2007) Spatio-temporal analysis of eukaryotic cell motility by improved force cytometry. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104:13343–13348Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Butler JP, Tolic-Norrelykke IM, Fabry B, et al (2002) Traction fields, moments, and strain energy that cells exert on their surroundings. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 282:C595–C605Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Tan JL, Tien J, Pirone DM, et al (2003) Cells lying on a bed of microneedles: an approach to isolate mechanical force. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100:1484–1489Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Sniadecki NJ and Chen CS (2007) Microfabricated silicone elastomeric post arrays for measuring traction forces of adherent cells. Meth Cell Biol 83:313–328Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Galbraith CG and Sheetz MP (1997) A micromachined device provides a new bend on fibroblast traction forces. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 94:9114–9118Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Balaban NQ, Schwarz US, Riveline D, et al (2001) Force and focal adhesion assembly: a close relationship studied using elastic micropatterned substrates. Nat Cell Biol 3:466–472Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Wang N, Ostuni E, Whitesides GM, et al (2002) Micropatterning tractional forces in living cells. Cell Motil Cytoskeleton 52:97–106Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Parker KK, Brock AL, Brangwynne C, et al (2002) Directional control of lamellipodia extension by constraining cell shape and orienting cell tractional forces. FASEB J 16:1195–1204Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Lemmon CA, Sniadecki NJ, Ruiz SA, et al (2005) Shear force at the cell-matrix interface: enhanced analysis for microfabricated post array detectors. Mech Chem Biosyst 2:1–16Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Reinhart-King CA, Dembo M, and Hammer DA (2003) Endothelial cell traction forces on RGD-derivatized polyacrylamide substrata. Langmuir 19:1573–1579Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Reinhart-King CA, Dembo M, and Hammer DA (2005) The dynamics and mechanics of endothelial cell spreading. Biophys J 89:676–689Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Lo CM, Wang HB, Dembo M, et al (2000) Cell movement is guided by the rigidity of the substrate. Biophys J 79:144–152Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Paszek MJ, Zahir N, Johnson KR, et al (2005) Tensional homeostasis and the malignant phenotype. Cancer Cell 8:241–254Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Califano JP and Reinhart-King CA (2010) Substrate stiffness and cell area drive cellular traction stresses in single cells and cells in contact. Cell Mol Bioeng 3:68–75Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Ren XD, Kiosses WB, and Schwartz MA (1999) Regulation of the small GTP-binding protein Rho by cell adhesion and the cytoskeleton. EMBO J 18:578–585Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Ingber DE (2002) Mechanical signaling and the cellular response to extracellular matrix in angiogenesis and cardiovascular physiology. Circ Res 91:877–887Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Leung DW, Cachianes G, Kuang WJ, et al (1989) Vascular endothelial growth factor is a secreted angiogenic mitogen. Science 246:1306–1309Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Nicosia RF (1998) What is the role of vascular endothelial growth factor-related molecules in tumor angiogenesis? Am J Pathol 153:11–16Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Huot J, Houle F, Rousseau S, et al (1998) SAPK2/p38-dependent F-actin reorganization regulates early membrane blebbing during stress-induced apoptosis. J Cell Biol 143:1361–1373Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    van Nieuw Amerongen GP, Koolwijk P, Versteilen A, et al (2003) Involvement of RhoA/Rho kinase signaling in VEGF-induced endothelial cell migration and angiogenesis in vitro. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 23:211–217Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Appleton CT, Usmani SE, Mort JS, et al (2010) Rho/ROCK and MEK/ERK activation by transforming growth factor-alpha induces articular cartilage degradation. Lab Invest 90:20–30Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Beningo KA, Dembo M, Kaverina I, et al (2001) Nascent focal adhesions are responsible for the generation of strong propulsive forces in migrating fibroblasts. J Cell Biol 153:881–888Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Sniadecki NJ, Anguelouch A, Yang MT, et al (2007) Magnetic microposts as an approach to apply forces to living cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104:14553–14558Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Nelson CM, Pirone DM, Tan JL, et al (2004) Vascular endothelial-cadherin regulates cytoskeletal tension, cell spreading, and focal adhesions by stimulating RhoA. Mol Biol Cell 15:2943–2953Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Kris AS, Kamm RD, and Sieminski AL (2008) VASP involvement in force-mediated adherens junction strengthening. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 375:134–138Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Ko KS, Arora PD, and McCulloch CA (2001) Cadherins mediate intercellular mechanical signaling in fibroblasts by activation of stretch-sensitive calcium-permeable channels. J Biol Chem 276:35967–35977Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Ganz A, Lambert M, Saez A, et al (2006) Traction forces exerted through N-cadherin contacts. Biol Cell 98:721–730Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Ladoux B, Anon E, Lambert M, et al (2010) Strength dependence of cadherin-mediated adhesions. Biophys J 98:534–542Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Ramachandran GN (1988) Stereochemistry of collagen. Int J Pept Protein Res 31:1–16MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Brodsky B and Baum J (2008) Structural biology: modelling collagen diseases. Nature 453:998–999Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Wakatsuki T, Kolodney MS, Zahalak GI, et al (2000) Cell mechanics studied by a reconstituted model tissue. Biophys J 79:2353–2368Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Tranquillo RT (1999) Self-organization of tissue-equivalents: the nature and role of contact guidance. Biochem Soc Symp 65:27–42Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Roy P, Petroll WM, Cavanagh HD, et al (1997) An in vitro force measurement assay to study the early mechanical interaction between corneal fibroblasts and collagen matrix. Exp Cell Res 232:106–117Google Scholar
  105. 105.
    Jhun CS, Evans MC, Barocas VH, et al (2009) Planar biaxial mechanical behavior of bioartificial tissues possessing prescribed fiber alignment. J Biomech Eng 131:081006Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Robinson PS, Johnson SL, Evans MC, et al (2008) Functional tissue-engineered valves from cell-remodeled fibrin with commissural alignment of cell-produced collagen. Tissue Eng Part A 14:83–95Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Berry CC, Shelton JC, and Lee DA (2009) Cell-generated forces influence the viability, metabolism and mechanical properties of fibroblast-seeded collagen gel constructs. J Tissue Eng Regen Med 3:43–53Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Sander EA, Stylianopoulos T, Tranquillo RT, et al (2009) Image-based multiscale modeling predicts tissue-level and network-level fiber reorganization in stretched cell-compacted collagen gels. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106:17675–17680Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Magnusson MK and Mosher DF (1998) Fibronectin: structure, assembly, and cardiovascular implications. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 18:1363–1370Google Scholar
  110. 110.
    Baneyx G, Baugh L, and Vogel V (2002) Fibronectin extension and unfolding within cell matrix fibrils controlled by cytoskeletal tension. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 99:5139–5143Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Zhong C, Chrzanowska-Wodnicka M, Brown J, et al (1998) Rho-mediated contractility exposes a cryptic site in fibronectin and induces fibronectin matrix assembly. J Cell Biol 141:539–551Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    Gao M, Craig D, Lequin O, et al (2003) Structure and functional significance of mechanically unfolded fibronectin type III1 intermediates. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100:14784–14789Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    Lemmon CA, Chen CS, and Romer LH (2009) Cell traction forces direct fibronectin matrix assembly. Biophys J 96:729–738Google Scholar
  114. 114.
    Hocking DC, Sottile J, and Langenbach KJ (2000) Stimulation of integrin-mediated cell contractility by fibronectin polymerization. J Biol Chem 275:10673–10682Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    Sottile J and Hocking DC (2002) Fibronectin polymerization regulates the composition and stability of extracellular matrix fibrils and cell-matrix adhesions. Mol Biol Cell 13:3546–3559Google Scholar
  116. 116.
    Sottile J and Chandler J (2005) Fibronectin matrix turnover occurs through a caveolin-1-dependent process. Mol Biol Cell 16:757–768Google Scholar
  117. 117.
    Bhadriraju K, Yang M, Alom Ruiz S, et al (2007) Activation of ROCK by RhoA is regulated by cell adhesion, shape, and cytoskeletal tension. Exp Cell Res 313:3616–3623Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Dzamba BJ, Jakab KR, Marsden M, et al (2009) Cadherin adhesion, tissue tension, and noncanonical Wnt signaling regulate fibronectin matrix organization. Dev Cell 16:421–432Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Vernon RB, Angello JC, Iruela-Arispe ML, et al (1992) Reorganization of basement membrane matrices by cellular traction promotes the formation of cellular networks in vitro. Lab Invest 66:536–547Google Scholar
  120. 120.
    Vernon RB, Lara SL, Drake CJ, et al (1995) Organized type I collagen influences endothelial patterns during “spontaneous angiogenesis in vitro”: planar cultures as models of vascular development. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Anim 31:120–131Google Scholar
  121. 121.
    Zhou X, Rowe RG, Hiraoka N, et al (2008) Fibronectin fibrillogenesis regulates three-dimensional neovessel formation. Genes Dev 22:1231–1243Google Scholar
  122. 122.
    Davis GE and Senger DR (2005) Endothelial extracellular matrix: biosynthesis, remodeling, and functions during vascular morphogenesis and neovessel stabilization. Circ Res 97:1093–1107Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    Oliver T, Dembo M, and Jacobson K (1999) Separation of propulsive and adhesive traction stresses in locomoting keratocytes. J Cell Biol 145:589–604Google Scholar
  124. 124.
    Mori H, Gjorevski N, Inman JL, et al (2009) Self-organization of engineered epithelial tubules by differential cellular motility. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106:14890–14895Google Scholar
  125. 125.
    Palecek SP, Loftus JC, Ginsberg MH, et al (1997) Integrin-ligand binding properties govern cell migration speed through cell-substratum adhesiveness. Nature 385:537–540Google Scholar
  126. 126.
    Maheshwari G, Wells A, Griffith LG, et al (1999) Biophysical integration of effects of epidermal growth factor and fibronectin on fibroblast migration. Biophys J 76:2814–2823Google Scholar
  127. 127.
    Peyton SR and Putnam AJ (2005) Extracellular matrix rigidity governs smooth muscle cell motility in a biphasic fashion. J Cell Physiol 204:198–209Google Scholar
  128. 128.
    Jannat RA, Dembo M, and Hammer DA (2010) Neutrophil adhesion and chemotaxis depend on substrate mechanics. J Phys Condens Matter 22:194117Google Scholar
  129. 129.
    Isenberg BC, Dimilla PA, Walker M, et al (2009) Vascular smooth muscle cell durotaxis depends on substrate stiffness gradient strength. Biophys J 97:1313–1322Google Scholar
  130. 130.
    Rorth P (2007) Collective guidance of collective cell migration. Trends Cell Biol 17:575–579Google Scholar
  131. 131.
    de Rooij J, Kerstens A, Danuser G, et al (2005) Integrin-dependent actomyosin contraction regulates epithelial cell scattering. J Cell Biol 171:153–164Google Scholar
  132. 132.
    du Roure O, Saez A, Buguin A, et al (2005) Force mapping in epithelial cell migration. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102:2390–2395Google Scholar
  133. 133.
    Trepat X, Wasserman MR, Angelini TE, et al (2009) Physical forces during collective cell migration. Nat Phys 5:426–430Google Scholar
  134. 134.
    Saez A, Ghibaudo M, Buguin A, et al (2007) Rigidity-driven growth and migration of epithelial cells on microstructured anisotropic substrates. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104:8281–8286Google Scholar
  135. 135.
    Scholey JM, Brust-Mascher I, and Mogilner A (2003) Cell division. Nature 422:746–752Google Scholar
  136. 136.
    Nelson CM, Jean RP, Tan JL, et al (2005) Emergent patterns of growth controlled by multicellular form and mechanics. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102:11594–11599Google Scholar
  137. 137.
    Li B, Li F, Puskar KM, et al (2009) Spatial patterning of cell proliferation and differentiation depends on mechanical stress magnitude. J Biomech 42:1622–1627Google Scholar
  138. 138.
    Gray DS, Liu WF, Shen CJ, et al (2008) Engineering amount of cell-cell contact demonstrates biphasic proliferative regulation through RhoA and the actin cytoskeleton. Exp Cell Res 314:2846–2854Google Scholar
  139. 139.
    Nelson CM and Chen CS (2003) VE-cadherin simultaneously stimulates and inhibits cell proliferation by altering cytoskeletal structure and tension. J Cell Sci 116:3571–3581Google Scholar
  140. 140.
    Wells RG (2008) The role of matrix stiffness in regulating cell behavior. Hepatology 47:1394–1400Google Scholar
  141. 141.
    Lammerding J, Kamm RD, and Lee RT (2004) Mechanotransduction in cardiac myocytes. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1015:53–70Google Scholar
  142. 142.
    Haga JH, Li YS, and Chien S (2007) Molecular basis of the effects of mechanical stretch on vascular smooth muscle cells. J Biomech 40:947–960Google Scholar
  143. 143.
    Ingber DE (2003) Mechanobiology and diseases of mechanotransduction. Ann Med 35:564–577Google Scholar
  144. 144.
    Jaalouk DE and Lammerding J (2009) Mechanotransduction gone awry. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 10:63–73Google Scholar
  145. 145.
    Butcher DT, Alliston T, and Weaver VM (2009) A tense situation: forcing tumour progression. Nat Rev Cancer 9:108–122Google Scholar
  146. 146.
    Huang S and Ingber DE (2005) Cell tension, matrix mechanics, and cancer development. Cancer Cell 8:175–176Google Scholar
  147. 147.
    Midwood KS, Williams LV, and Schwarzbauer JE (2004) Tissue repair and the dynamics of the extracellular matrix. Int J Biochem Cell Biol 36:1031–1037Google Scholar
  148. 148.
    Hinz B (2009) Tissue stiffness, latent TGF-beta1 activation, and mechanical signal transduction: implications for the pathogenesis and treatment of fibrosis. Curr Rheumatol Rep 11:120–126Google Scholar
  149. 149.
    Li Z, Dranoff JA, Chan EP, et al (2007) Transforming growth factor-beta and substrate stiffness regulate portal fibroblast activation in culture. Hepatology 46:1246–1256Google Scholar
  150. 150.
    Georges PC, Hui JJ, Gombos Z, et al (2007) Increased stiffness of the rat liver precedes matrix deposition: implications for fibrosis. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 293:G1147–G1154Google Scholar
  151. 151.
    Grossman W, Jones D, and McLaurin LP (1975) Wall stress and patterns of hypertrophy in the human left ventricle. J Clin Invest 56:56–64Google Scholar
  152. 152.
    Sun Y and Weber KT (2000) Infarct scar: a dynamic tissue. Cardiovasc Res 46:250–256Google Scholar
  153. 153.
    Barry SP, Davidson SM, and Townsend PA (2008) Molecular regulation of cardiac hypertrophy. Int J Biochem Cell Biol 40:2023–2039Google Scholar
  154. 154.
    Engler AJ, Carag-Krieger C, Johnson CP, et al (2008) Embryonic cardiomyocytes beat best on a matrix with heart-like elasticity: scar-like rigidity inhibits beating. J Cell Sci 121:3794–3802Google Scholar
  155. 155.
    Zieman SJ, Melenovsky V, and Kass DA (2005) Mechanisms, pathophysiology, and therapy of arterial stiffness. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 25:932–943Google Scholar
  156. 156.
    Ingber DE (1997) Tensegrity: the architectural basis of cellular mechanotransduction. Annu Rev Physiol 59:575–599Google Scholar
  157. 157.
    Mehta D and Malik AB (2006) Signaling mechanisms regulating endothelial permeability. Physiol Rev 86:279–367Google Scholar
  158. 158.
    Birukova AA, Arce FT, Moldobaeva N, et al (2009) Endothelial permeability is controlled by spatially defined cytoskeletal mechanics: atomic force microscopy force mapping of pulmonary endothelial monolayer. Nanomedicine 5:30–41Google Scholar
  159. 159.
    Cuerrier CM, Gagner A, Lebel R, et al (2009) Effect of thrombin and bradykinin on endothelial cell mechanical properties monitored through membrane deformation. J Mol Recognit 22:389–396Google Scholar
  160. 160.
    Oakes PW, Patel DC, Morin NA, et al (2009) Neutrophil morphology and migration are affected by substrate elasticity. Blood 114:1387–1395Google Scholar
  161. 161.
    Stroka KM and Aranda-Espinoza H (2009) Neutrophils display biphasic relationship between migration and substrate stiffness. Cell Motil Cytoskeleton 66:328–341Google Scholar
  162. 162.
    Kang I, Wang Q, Eppell SJ, et al (2010) Effect of neutrophil adhesion on the mechanical properties of lung microvascular endothelial cells. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol 43:591–598Google Scholar
  163. 163.
    Rabodzey A, Alcaide P, Luscinskas FW, et al (2008) Mechanical forces induced by the transendothelial migration of human neutrophils. Biophys J 95:1428–1438Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • John Huynh
  • Joseph P. Califano
  • Cynthia A. Reinhart-King
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Biomedical EngineeringCornell UniversityIthacaUSA

Personalised recommendations