1 Department of Physics, Clarkson University, Potsdam, New York 13676; and 2 Department of Physics and Biology, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri 65211
![]() |
ABSTRACT |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
We constructed a model cytoskeleton to investigate the proposal that this interconnected filamentous structure can act as a mechano- and signal transducer. The model cytoskeleton is composed of rigid rods representing actin filaments, which are connected with springs representing cross-linker molecules. The entire mesh is placed in viscous cytoplasm. The model eukaryotic cell is submitted to either shock wave-like or periodic mechanical perturbations at its membrane. We calculated the efficiency of this network to transmit energy to the nuclear wall as a function of cross-linker stiffness, cytoplasmic viscosity, and external stimulation frequency. We found that the cytoskeleton behaves as a tunable band filter: for given linker molecules, energy transmission peaks in a narrow range of stimulation frequencies. Most of the normal modes of the network are spread over the same frequency range. Outside this range, signals are practically unable to reach their destination. Changing the cellular ratios of linker molecules with different elastic characteristics can control the allowable frequency range and, with it, the efficiency of mechanotransduction.
intracellular signal transduction; computational model; mechanical energy transfer
![]() |
INTRODUCTION |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
REGULATION OF VARIOUS CELL FUNCTIONS by mechanical forces has by now been amply demonstrated (for reviews, see Refs. 5-7, 21, 33, and 41). Because all cells of an organism are exposed to external forces, it may not be surprising that cells sense these forces. What is surprising is the fact that physical factors control biological processes such as cell differentiation, proliferation (35), gene expression (19, 29, 35), and, in particular, signal transduction, the subject of the present work, that are believed to be regulated by specific biochemical molecules and reactions. The amplitude and frequency of Ca2+ waves induces differential activation of transcription factors (8). Shear stress activates G proteins in a magnitude- and rate-dependent manner (13, 14). The extent of tyrosine phosphorylation depends on the frequency of the cyclic force applied to integrin receptors (39, 44). It seems that mechanical and biochemical signaling effects converge on the molecular scale.
Despite recent efforts, the cellular mechanism of mechanically induced signal transduction is largely unknown. It is widely accepted that such signaling pathways start with mechanosensitive cell surface receptors (1) like integrins, cell adhesion molecules (18, 23, 25, 38, 39, 44), or stretch-activated ion channels (30, 40). The conformational change in these receptors then activates second messengers and/or induces a cascade of enzymatic reactions, which may involve a large number of downstream players. How these molecules carry out their spatial and temporal functions is still a mystery.
It has been recognized that mechanical signaling involves the cytoskeleton (17). Inhibition of actin stress fiber development blocks fluid shear-induced gene expression in osteoblasts (35). Integrin-mediated signaling processes are interrupted by cytoskeletal disassembly (38, 44). In the absence of cytoskeletal attachment, cadherins do not function as cell adhesion molecules and do not transmit mechanical signals (15, 34). Oscillatory mechanical stimulation of chick osteoblasts increases the levels of osteopontin provided the actin cytoskeleton is intact (48). Mechanical stretching of rat vascular smooth muscle cells induces extracellular signal-regulated kinase by activation of Rho kinase. A precondition for this to take place is an uninterrupted microfilament network (32). More direct evidence of the importance of coupling of mechanical forces and the cytoskeleton is the remarkable role microtubules play during mitosis. Tension in the kinetochores is crucial to the normal progression of anaphase. Without tension, anaphase is delayed. When tension is restored through mitotic forces or micromanipulation, cell division proceeds (31).
Because of its interconnected structure, the cytoskeleton is an obvious candidate for mechanotransduction (10, 23). However, its role in signaling also is secured by the fact that it accommodates the numerous signaling molecules (e.g., kinases, phosphatases) a cell possesses (17, 27, 44).
The specific relationship between cytoskeletal structure, cellular mechanics, and intracellular signaling is unclear. Proposals vary from continuum models (9) to tensegrity (16) and percolation structures (10). Recently, it was suggested that a specific way the cytoskeleton may participate in signal transduction is by furnishing tracks on which signaling agents can move (even) without molecular motors. It was shown that this mechanism could significantly improve the efficiency of signal transfer (46).
If indeed mechanical force propagation through the cytoskeleton can provide biological specificity, as numerous experiments have shown, the filaments must be able to transmit mechanical energy with high reliability. This energy transfer, when sensed by signaling molecules anchored to the cytoskeleton, may change their molecular conformation, thus providing a specific contribution to intracellular signaling pathways.
Motivated by the possible role of mechanical processes in intracellular signaling, in the present work we have studied the energy transfer properties of the cytoskeleton using computer simulations. Our basic assumption was that the intracellular filamentous mesh is imbedded in the highly viscous cytoplasm; thus it is a source of energy dissipation. Because in most cases cells are exposed to intermittent mechanical perturbations (14, 22, 30, 44), we subjected the receptors of our model cells to oscillatory forces and asked the question, what ratio of the supplied energy reaches the nucleus? We have shown that at physiological filament concentrations and realistic physical (i.e., viscoelasticity) parameter values, the energy transfer ratio peaks in the 0.1- to 10-Hz frequency range. This finding is consistent with the results of recent experiments probing the mechanotransductive properties of the cytoskeleton (44).
![]() |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Model cytoskeleton.
As a model for the cell, we used a cube with sides of 5 µm, centered
inside another cube with sides of 10 µm (Fig.
1). The former cube represents the
nucleus. Our model cytoskeleton consists of rigid rods connected
through springs. The rods may represent various cytoskeletal filaments
if their diameter is chosen appropriately. The cytoskeleton of a
typical eukaryotic cell comprises three types of filaments: actin
filaments, microtubules, and intermediate filaments. These filaments
are cross-linked (36, 47). They form a globally
interconnected network that extends from the cell membrane to the
nuclear wall. In this work, to simplify the simulations, we introduced
only one kind of filament. We used rods of 8 nm in diameter (i.e.,
model actin filaments) with lengths between 0.5 and 1.5 µm. Each rod
was characterized by six parameters that describe its location in
space: Cartesian coordinates for one of the end points, the rod length,
and two angles determining its orientation. The random network of rods
was generated in a computer, using independent random numbers for each
of the six parameters.
|
Equations of motion.
Once a network was constructed, a mechanical signal was applied in the
form of sinusoidal mechanical torque to the rods anchored to the cell
membrane. This corresponded to a situation recently realized
experimentally by Maksym et al. (22). These authors oscillated small magnetic beads bound specifically to integrin receptors. Because integrins are connected to the cytoskeleton, they
were able to transmit mechanical energy to the network and study its
viscoelastic response. In our system, because of the springs, the
signal propagated through the network. We were eventually interested in
the effect of this mechanical signal on the filaments attached to the
nuclear wall. To follow the signal at any point in time, we had to
solve two sets of linear differential equations for each rod. One is
the linear Newtonian set of equations
![]() |
(1) |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
(2) |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Computer. Calculations were performed on Intel 400-MHz Celeron machines. CPU time for one typical run (including the construction of the model cytoskeleton with 25,000-35,000 rods and the solution of the equations of motion for a given filament configuration and 20-s simulated time) was about 48 h.
![]() |
RESULTS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
A mechanical signal can be initiated in many ways and have many forms. In this work we concentrated on two types of mechanical signals. The first was a shock wave in which a mechanical stress was applied to the membrane-anchored filaments (MAFs) for a very brief period of time (instantaneously). The second was a sinusoidal stimulation of MAFs for a set amount of time. In both cases the ratio of the total energy on the nucleus and the total energy on the membrane was calculated as a measure of the efficiency of the network as an information transmitting system.
In these simulations we analyzed the influence of three major
parameters on signal propagation: the cytoplasmic viscosity, the
stiffness of the cross-linking molecules, and, in the case of a
continuous sinusoidal signal, the external signal frequency. The value
of cytoplasmic viscosity depends on many factors, including the level
of cytoskeleton polymerization. We used three values: w
10
w, and 100
w, where
w is
the viscosity of water (1 cP). For the stiffness of cross-linkers, we
used 100, 1,000, and 10,000 pN/µm. These parameter values
were dictated by data found in the literature (3, 20, 26,
28). The response for continuous stimulation was measured over
frequencies ranging from 0.1 to 500 rad/s.
Shock wave stimulus.
The main characteristics of the energy distribution in a system
subjected to an instantaneous stimulation are summarized in Fig.
2. The initial signal was achieved by
compressing the springs attached to the MAFs to a certain fraction of
their equilibrium lengths. (The results are virtually independent
of the initial compression.) The stiffness of the springs in all cases
was set to 1,000 pN/µm. As expected, the energy on the nucleus
decreased with increasing cytoplasmic viscosity. In all cases the
signal on the nucleus attained its maximum amplitude relatively fast (~3 s). This conclusion is not sensitive to filament concentration once beyond the percolation threshold, where cytoplasmic filaments form
an interconnected network, which extends from the cell membrane to the
nucleus (46). Most of the simulations were performed at
the concentration of model actin filaments of 1.56 mg/ml, corresponding to 25,000 filaments. (At such concentrations, results depend very little on the number of rods, as shown in Fig.
3.) The ratio of the energies ranges from
<1% at the highest viscosity to 3% at the lowest viscosity. However,
one must take into account that because of the geometry of our system,
the number of filaments connected to the membrane was four times larger
than the number of filaments connected to the nucleus. Hence, the
energy ratio per filament ranged between 4 and 12%.
|
|
Continuous stimulation.
Matters became more complex when the system was subjected to a
sinusoidal stimulation. Two characteristic energy patterns are shown in
Fig. 4. In Fig. 4A, the system
was excited with a frequency of 10 rad/s (~1.6 Hz). The energies at
both the membrane and the nucleus settled around an equilibrium value
with very little fluctuations. In Fig. 4B, the signal had a
frequency of 0.1 rad/s (~0.016 Hz) and lasted 100 s. In this
case it appeared as if no steady state was attained. Eventually the
system stabilized (results not shown), but the fluctuations around the
average remained significant. The system followed the signal on both
the membrane and the nucleus, with noticeable shift in phase. When the
stimulation ended, the system exhibited a shock wave-like response.
|
Effect of intrinsic intracellular properties.
In Fig. 5, we calculated the energy
transfer ratio as a function of external stimulation frequency,
stiffness of linkers, and cytoplasmic viscosity. In all cases there was
a distinct peak, where the ratio reached a maximum. The location of
this peak depended on cross-linker stiffness and apparently was
insensitive to cytoplasmic viscosity. Furthermore, the width of the
peak increased, whereas its height decreased, with stiffness. Some of
these findings are easy to interpret. In the case of low-frequency
stimulation, the cytoskeleton had enough time to rearrange itself to
adjust locally to a new low-energy configuration. Thus the system was
able to absorb a significant fraction of the input energy, allowing
only a small amount to arrive at the nucleus. At very high stimulation frequencies, the springs effectively froze and behaved as
rigid objects; again very little energy was transmitted through the network. Between these extreme situations the transfer ratio reached a
maximum value that, as expected, decreased with viscosity. These results show that with stiffer cross-linkers, the range of frequencies at which a signal can get through is somewhat larger, whereas its
intensity is comparably smaller.
|
|
![]() |
DISCUSSION |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
It is widely accepted that mechanical forces are directly involved in cell function regulation. Nevertheless, the role of mechanical processes in intracellular signaling is still being questioned. This is due to two major limitations associated with mechanical signals. First, such signals are easily degraded because of rapid energy dissipation. Secondly, to achieve specificity, mechanical signals eventually have to regulate biochemical reactions. How this conversion process takes place is still obscure.
It has been demonstrated amply that in many mechanical and biochemical processes, the cytoskeleton plays an essential role. For example, the cytoskeleton is responsible for cell shape regulation and locomotion (mechanical effects) and at the same time provides docking sites for conventional signaling molecules (chemical effect). This duality in the cytoskeleton's role makes it an ideal candidate for a cellular mechanochemical conversion apparatus.
In the present study, using a simplified model we demonstrated that by exploiting the interconnected character of the cytoskeleton, a mechanical signal can traverse the entire gap between the membrane and the nucleus in a relatively short time without being completely degraded. Furthermore, by tuning the signal frequency to the network's intrinsic feature, the vibrational normal modes, biochemical reactions could be differentially affected.
We started with a random network consisting of stiff rods and elastic springs that represent cytoskeletal filaments and cross-linking molecules, respectively. We applied two different types of mechanical signals at the cell membrane: a shock wave and a continuous sinusoidal stimulation. We compared the output energy on the nucleus with the input energy on the membrane. We then looked at how this ratio changed with the physical properties of the network-signal system: viscosity, cross-linkers elasticity, and signal frequency.
When the network was perturbed by a shock wave at the filament concentration used in this work (1.56 mg/ml, corresponding to 25,000 "actin-like filaments"), the signal reached its maximal value at the nucleus within 3 s after initiation. This finding is independent of cytoplasmic viscosity or initial signal amplitude. When continuous stimulation was considered, different energy profiles were observed. Rather than achieving a distinct peak, as was the case with a shock wave, above a certain driving frequency the energy profile at the nucleus reached a steady-state level with few fluctuations. Again, it took the system about 3 s to reach this state. The energy loss was apparent but not detrimental to the integrity of the signal. Below a certain frequency, the system stabilized only after a much longer transient time, the fluctuations around the average remained significant and the energy transferred to the nucleus was comparatively small (see Figs. 4 and 5).
Our results are consistent with a number of recent experimental
findings, and some of our conclusions could be explored experimentally. Numerous investigators have found that cells are most responsive to
sinusoidal stimulation within a narrow range of frequencies between 0.1 and 10 Hz (43-45). In our simulation, the highest
energy transfer ratio was achieved in this exact frequency range
(provided the spring constant was between 100 and 1,000 pN/µm). The
mechanical properties of the linker molecules (i.e., springs) strongly
influence the width of this range. The stiffer the links, the wider the range. [The values of cross-linker stiffness and cytoplasmic viscosity used in the present simulations correspond to measurements cited in the
literature (3, 20, 26, 28).] Thus the cytoskeleton effectively behaves as a "tunable band-pass filter:" for given linker molecules, the signals with frequencies outside a characteristic range are unable to reach their destination. Changing the cellular ratios of linker molecules with different elastic constants
(-actinin, filamin, plectin, etc.) can control the allowable
frequency range and, with it, the efficiency of mechanical signal propagation.
The normal modes of our model cytoskeleton in general change with alterations in its architecture. However, our networks are random and well above the percolation threshold. Thus their physical properties, in particular normal modes, change little with configurational modifications, as long as the elastic characteristics of the linkers do not change (46). We have shown that for our networks, most of the normal modes are spread over the same frequency range where energy transduction is the most efficient (see Fig. 6). In a true cell, controlled cytoskeletal modifications (e.g., in the case of locomotion, cell division, etc.) may provide another mechanism to select the "right signals at the right time."
A mechanical signal eventually must be translated into a biochemical reaction. Because many signaling molecules reside on the cytoskeleton (17, 27, 44), it is reasonable to assume that mechanical stimulation can activate some of them. Every signaling molecule has a characteristic activation rate. If the activation rate of a specific molecule matches the normal modes of the system, the probability of it being activated is the highest. The normal modes of the cytoskeletal mesh can be determined and then appropriately tuned by modifying the properties of the cross-linkers. For this, the motion of a particular segment of the network has to be followed with a high-speed camera. [Work along these lines already has been performed by Prahlad et al. (37), who monitored shape changes of individual intermediate filaments in living cells.] Fourier transformation of the amplitude of the vibrational motion, as explained earlier, provides the eigenfrequencies.
In Fig. 7, we demonstrate how energy
transduction through the cytoskeleton could trigger or facilitate
specific biochemical reactions. Energy transfer along the filaments
causes their displacement. This may allow signaling molecules loosely
bound to the cytoskeleton to approach and thus react with each other.
|
Our model is an oversimplified description of intracellular mechanical signal/energy transduction. Because of finite computer time, we could not reach physiological concentrations in our simulations. [However, because we were well above the percolation threshold, all conclusions reached in this work are practically insensitive to filament concentration above the value 1.56 mg/ml used here (see also Ref. 46).] Cytoskeletal filaments are represented by rigid rods, instead of being semiflexible. [Because the persistence length of F-actin is >10 µm (11), this restriction did not affect our results.] The dynamic nature of the mesh due to constant polymerization and depolymerization of the filaments is not considered. [As found by McGrath et al. (24) for physiological concentrations, the typical turnover time of a cytoskeletal actin filament is around 6 min, which is well above the time our signal reached the nucleus.] Linker molecules are replaced by simple springs. The torsional elasticity of both the filaments and the linkers is not taken into account. More importantly, we have concentrated on one particular pathway: energy propagation along cytoskeletal filaments. We have not included specific biochemical signaling molecules and their interactions. Such complications can, in principle, be incorporated into our computer simulations.
The main objective of the present work was to suggest a specific mechanism for the transduction of mechanical signals to which all living cells are exposed. The main conclusion from our results is that the cytoskeleton can transfer reliably (promptly and without loss of information) external mechanical signals into various parts of the cell (in particular to the nucleus). The presented mechanism is complimentary to conventional biochemical signaling pathways and, because of the intrinsic properties (i.e., stiffness, normal modes) of the filamentous network, supplies another level of cellular control.
![]() |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
---|
We greatly acknowledge useful discussions with D. ben-Avraham.
![]() |
FOOTNOTES |
---|
This work was supported by National Science Foundation Grant IBN-97100010.
Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: Y. Shafrir, Laboratory of Experimental and Computational Biology, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892-5677 (E-mail: yinon{at}nih.gov).
The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
10.1152/ajpcell.00394.2001
Received 12 October 2001; accepted in final form 22 October 2001.
![]() |
REFERENCES |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
1.
Banes, AJ,
Tzuzaki M,
Yamamoto J,
Fischer T,
Brigman B,
Brown T,
and
Miller L.
Mechanoreception at the cellular level: detection, interpretation and diversity of responses to mechanical signals.
Biochem Cell Biol
73:
349-365,
1993.
2.
Berg, HC.
Random Walks in Biology. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press, 1993.
3.
Bicknese, S,
Periasamy N,
Shohet SB,
and
Verkman AS.
Cytoplasmic viscosity near the cell plasma membrane: measurement by evanescent field frequency-domain microfluorimetry.
Biophys J
65:
1272-1282,
1993[Abstract].
4.
Billeter, J,
and
Pelcovits R.
Simulations of liquid crystals.
Comput Phys
12:
440-448,
1998[ISI].
5.
Davies, E.
Intercellular and intracellular signals and their transduction via the plasma membrane-cytoskeleton interface.
Semin Cell Biol
4:
139-147,
1993[Medline].
6.
Davis, MJ,
and
Hill MA.
Signaling mechanisms underlying the vascular myogenic response.
Physiol Rev
79:
387-423,
1999
7.
Davis, PE.
Flow-mediated endothelial mechanotransduction.
Physiol Rev
75:
519-560,
1995
8.
Dolmetsch, E,
Lewis RS,
Goodnow C,
and
Healy JL.
Differential activation of transcription factors induced by Ca2+ response amplitude and duration.
Nature
386:
855-858,
1997[ISI][Medline].
9.
Dong, CR,
Skalak R,
and
Sung KL.
Cytoplasmic rheology of passive neutrophils.
Biorheology
28:
557-567,
1991[ISI][Medline].
10.
Forgacs, G.
On the possible role of the cytoskeletal filamentous network in intracellular signaling: an approach based on percolation.
J Cell Sci
108:
2131-2143,
1995
11.
Gittes, F,
Mickey B,
Nettleton J,
and
Howard J.
Flexural rigidity of microtubules and actin filaments measured from thermal fluctuations in shape.
J Cell Biol
120:
923-934,
1993[Abstract].
12.
Goldstein, H.
Classical Mechanics. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1980.
13.
Gudi, S,
Nolan JP,
and
Frangos JA.
Modulation of GTPase activity of G proteins by fluid stress and phospholipid composition.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
95:
2616-2519,
1998.
14.
Gudi, SRP,
Lee AA,
Clarks A,
and
Frangos JA.
Equibiaxial strain and strain rate stimulate early activation of G proteins in cardiac fibroblasts.
Am J Physiol Cell Physiol
274:
C1424-C1428,
1998
15.
Gumbiner, BM.
Cell adhesion: the molecular basis of tissue architecture and morphogenesis.
Cell
384:
345-357,
1996.
16.
Ingber, DE.
Tensegrity: the architectural basis of cellular mechanotransduction.
Annu Rev Physiol
59:
575-599,
1991[ISI][Medline].
17.
Janmey, P.
The cytoskeleton and cell signaling: component localization and mechanical coupling.
Physiol Rev
78:
763-781,
1998
18.
Juliano, RL,
and
Haskill S.
Signal transduction from the extracellular matrix.
J Cell Biol
120:
577-585,
1993[ISI][Medline].
19.
Komuro, I,
Katoh Y,
Kaida T,
Shibazaki Y,
Kurabeyshi M,
Hoh M,
Takaku F,
and
Yazaki Y.
Mechanical loading simulates cell hypertrophy and specific gene expression in cultured rat cardiac myocytes.
J Biol Chem
266:
1265-1268,
1991
20.
Lang, I,
Scholz M,
and
Peters R.
Molecular mobility and nucleocytoplasmic flux in hepatoma cells.
J Cell Biol
102:
1183-1190,
1986[Abstract].
21.
Liu, M,
Tanswell AK,
and
Prost M.
Mechanical force-induced signal transduction in lung cells.
Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol
277:
L667-L683,
1999
22.
Maksym, GN,
Fabry B,
Butler JP,
Navajas D,
Tschumperlin DJ,
Laporte JD,
and
Fredberg JJ.
Mechanical properties of cultured human airway smooth muscle cells from 0.05 to 0.4 Hz.
J Appl Physiol
89:
1617-1618,
2000
23.
Maniotis, AJ,
Chen CS,
and
Ingber DE.
Demonstration of mechanical connections between integrins, cytoskeletal filaments and nucleoplasm that stabilize nuclear structure.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
94:
849-854,
1997
24.
McGrath, JL,
Tardy Y,
Dewey CF, Jr,
Meister JJ,
and
Hartwig JH.
Simultaneous measurements of actin filament turnover, filament fraction, and monomer diffusion in endothelial cells.
Biophys J
75:
2070-2078,
1998
25.
Millward-Sadler, SJ,
Wright MO,
Lee H,
Nishida K,
Caldwell H,
Nuki G,
and
Salter DM.
Integrin-regulated secretion of interleukin 4: a novel pathway of mechanotransduction in human articular chondrocytes.
J Cell Biol
145:
183-189,
1999
26.
Minoura, I,
Yagi T,
and
Kamiya R.
Direct measurement of inter-doublet elasticity in flagellar axonemes.
Cell Struct Funct
24:
27-33,
1999[ISI][Medline].
27.
Mochly-Rosen, D.
Localization of protein kinases by anchoring proteins: a theme on signal transduction.
Science
268:
247-251,
1995[ISI][Medline].
28.
Molloy, JE,
Burns JE,
Sparrow JC,
Tregear RT,
Kendrick-Jones J,
and
White DC.
Single-molecule mechanics of heavy meromyosin and S1 interacting with rabbit or Drosophila actins using optical tweezers.
Biophys J
68:
298S-305S,
1995[Medline].
29.
Nakamura, T,
Liu M,
Mourgeon E,
Slutsky A,
and
Post M.
Mechanical strain and dexamethasone selectively increase surfactant protein C and tropoelastin gene expression.
Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol
278:
L974-L980,
2000
30.
Naruse, K,
Yamada T,
and
Sokabe M.
Involvement of SA channels in orienting response of cultured endothelial cells to cyclic stretch.
Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol
274:
H1532-H1538,
1998
31.
Nicklas, RB,
Ward SC,
and
Gorbsky GJ.
Kinetochore chemistry is sensitive to tension and may link mitotic forces to a cell cycle checkpoint.
J Cell Biol
130:
929-939,
1995[Abstract].
32.
Numaguchi, K,
Eguchi S,
Yamakawa T,
Motley ED,
and
Inagami T.
Mechanotransduction of rat aortic vascular smooth muscle cells requires RhoA and intact actin filaments.
Circ Res
85:
5-11,
1999
33.
Osol, G.
Mechanotransduction by vascular smooth muscle.
J Vasc Res
32:
275-292,
1995[ISI][Medline].
34.
Ozawa, M,
Ringwald M,
and
Kemler R.
Uvomorulin-catenin complex formation is regulated by a specific domain in the cytoplasmic region of the cell adhesion molecule.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
87:
4246-4250,
1990[Abstract].
35.
Pavalko, FM,
Chen NX,
Turner CH,
Burr DB,
Atkinson S,
Hsieh YF,
Qui J,
and
Duncan RL.
Fluid shear-induced mechanical signaling in MC3T3-E1 osteoblasts requires cytoskeleton-integrin interactions.
Am J Physiol Cell Physiol
275:
C1591-C1601,
1998
36.
Pollard, TD,
Selden SC,
and
Maupin P.
Interaction of actin filaments with microtubules.
J Cell Biol
99:
33s-37s,
1984
37.
Prahlad, V,
Yoon M,
Moir RD,
Vale RD,
and
Goldman RD.
Rapid movements of vimentin on microtubule tracks: kinesin-dependent assembly of intermediate filament networks.
J Cell Biol
143:
159-170,
1998
38.
Rosales, C,
O'Brien V,
Kornberg L,
and
Juliano R.
Signal transduction by cell adhesion receptors.
Biochim Biophys Acta
1242:
77-98,
1995[ISI][Medline].
39.
Rychly, J,
Pommerenke H,
Durr F,
Schreiber E,
and
Nebe B.
Analysis of spatial distributions of cellular molecules during mechanical stressing of cell surface receptors using confocal microscopy.
Cell Biol Int
22:
7-12,
1998[ISI][Medline].
40.
Sachs, F.
Mechanical transduction by membrane ion channels: a mini review.
Mol Cell Biochem
104:
57-60,
1991[ISI][Medline].
41.
Sadosima, J,
and
Izumo S.
The cellular and molecular response of cardiac myocytes to mechanical stress.
Annu Rev Physiol
59:
551-571,
1997[ISI][Medline].
42.
Sahimi, M.
Applications of Percolation Theory. London: Taylor and Francis, 1994.
43.
Salter, DM,
Robb JE,
and
Wright MO.
Electrophysiological responses of human bone cells to mechanical stimulation: evidence for specific integrin function in mechano-transduction.
J Bone Miner Res
12:
1133-1141,
1997[ISI][Medline].
44.
Schmidt, C,
Pommerenke H,
Durr F,
Nebe B,
and
Rychly J.
Mechanical stressing of integrin receptors induces enhanced tyrosine phosphorylation of cytoskeletally anchored proteins.
J Biol Chem
273:
5081-5085,
1998
45.
Schmidt, FG,
Hinner B,
Sackmann E,
and
Tang JX.
Viscoelastic properties of semiflexible filamentous bacteriophage fd.
Phys Rev E Stat Phys Plasmas Fluids Relat Interdiscip Topics
62:
5509-5517,
2000[Medline].
46.
Shafrir, Y,
ben-Avraham D,
and
Forgacs G.
Trafficking and signaling through the cytoskeleton: a specific mechanism.
J Cell Sci
113:
2747-2757,
2000
47.
Svitkina, TM,
Verkhovsky AB,
and
Borisy GG.
Plectin side arms mediate interaction of intermediate filaments with microtubules and other components of the cytoskeleton.
J Cell Biol
135:
991-1007,
1996[Abstract].
48.
Toma, CD,
Ashkar S,
Gray ML,
Schaffer JL,
and
Gerstenfeld LC.
Signal transduction of mechanical stimuli is dependent on microfilament integrity: identification of osteopontin as a mechanically induced gene in osteoblasts.
J Bone Miner Res
12:
1626-1636,
1997[ISI][Medline].