reinforcement versus fluidization in cytoskeletal mechanoresponsiveness强化与细胞骨架mechanoresponsiveness流化.pdfVIP

Reinforcement versus Fluidization in Cytoskeletal Mechanoresponsiveness 1 1 1 1 2 Ramaswamy Krishnan , Chan Young Park , Yu-Chun Lin , Jere Mead , Richard T. Jaspers , Xavier 3 1 1 1 4 Trepat , Guillaume Lenormand , Dhananjay Tambe , Alexander V. Smolensky , Andrew H. Knoll , 1 1 James P. Butler , Jeffrey J. Fredberg * 1 Program in Molecular and Integrative Physiological Sciences, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America, 2 Research Institute MOVE, Faculty of Human Movement Sciences, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 3 Unitat de Biofisica i Bioenginyeria, Universitat de Barcelona – IBEC, Barcelona, Spain, 4 Botanical Museum, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America Abstract Every adherent eukaryotic cell exerts appreciable traction forces upon its substrate. Moreover, every resident cell within the heart, great vessels, bladder, gut or lung routinely experiences large periodic stretches. As an acute response to such stretches the cytoskeleton can stiffen, increase traction forces and reinforce, as reported by some, or can soften and fluidize, as reported more recently by our laboratory, but in any given circumstance it remains unknown which response might prevail or why. Using a novel nanotechnology, we show here that in loading conditions expected in most physiological circumstances the localized reinforcement response fails to scale up to the level of homogeneous cell stretch; fluidization trumps reinforcement. Whereas the reinforcement response is known to b