Vinculin tension distributions of individual stress fibers within cell-matrix adhesions

Journal of Cell Science (Impact Factor: 5.43). 05/2013; 126(14). DOI: 10.1242/jcs.119032
Source: PubMed


Actomyosin stress fibers (SFs) enable cells to exert traction on planar extracellular matrices (ECMs) by tensing focal adhesions (FAs) at the cell-ECM interface. While it is widely appreciated that the spatial and temporal distribution of these tensile forces play key roles in polarity, motility, fate choice, and other defining cell behaviors, virtually nothing is known about how an individual SF quantitatively contributes to tensile loads borne by specific molecules within associated FAs. We address this key open question by using femtosecond laser ablation to sever single SFs in cells while tracking tension across vinculin using a molecular optical sensor. We show that disruption of a single SF reduces tension across vinculin in FAs located throughout the cell, with enriched vinculin tension reduction in FAs oriented parallel to the targeted SF. Remarkably, however, some subpopulations of FAs exhibit enhanced vinculin tension upon SF irradiation and undergo dramatic, unexpected transitions between tension-enhanced and tension-reduced states. These changes depend strongly on the location of the severed SF, consistent with our earlier finding that different SF pools are regulated by distinct myosin activators. We critically discuss the extent to which these measurements can be interpreted in terms of whole-FA tension and traction and propose a model that relates SF tension to adhesive loads and cell shape stability. These studies represent the most direct and high-resolution intracellular measurements of SF contributions to tension on specific FA proteins to date and offer a new paradigm for investigating regulation of adhesive complexes by cytoskeletal force.


Available from: Ching-Wei Chang, Jun 19, 2014
  • Source
    • "On the basis of their subcellular location and molecular composition, stress fibers have been divided into three classes: ventral, dorsal and transverse arcs (Naumanen et al. 2008). At the microscopic level, stress fibers are composed of antiparallel arrays of F-actin bundles (approximately 10–30 actin filaments) stabilized by actin-binding proteins and interleaved with the molecular motor nonmuscle myosin II (Thoresen et al. 2011; Chang and Kumar 2013). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Actomyosin stress fibers, one of the main components of the cell's cytoskeleton, provide mechanical stability to adherent cells by applying and transmitting tensile forces onto the extracellular matrix (ECM) at the sites of cell-ECM adhesion. While it is widely accepted that changes in spatial and temporal distribution of stress fibers affect the cell's mechanical properties, there is no quantitative knowledge on how stress fiber amount and organization directly modulate cell stiffness. We address this key open question by combining atomic force microscopy with simultaneous fluorescence imaging of living cells, and combine for the first time reliable quantitative parameters obtained from both techniques. We show that the amount of myosin and (to a lesser extent) actin assembled in stress fibers directly modulates cell stiffness in adherent mouse fibroblasts (NIH3T3). In addition, the spatial distribution of stress fibers has a second-order modulatory effect. In particular, the presence of either fibers located in the cell periphery, aligned fibers or thicker fibers gives rise to reinforced cell stiffness. Our results provide basic and significant information that will help design optimal protocols to regulate the mechanical properties of adherent cells via pharmacological interventions that alter stress fiber assembly or via micropatterning techniques that restrict stress fiber spatial organization.
    Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology 07/2015; DOI:10.1007/s10237-015-0706-9 · 3.15 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: One of the most unique physical features of cell adhesion to external surfaces is the active generation of mechanical force at the cell-material interface. This includes pulling forces generated by contractile polymer bundles and networks, and pushing forces generated by the polymerization of polymer networks. These forces are transmitted to the substrate mainly by focal adhesions, which are large, yet highly dynamic adhesion clusters. Tissue cells use these forces to sense the physical properties of their environment and to communicate with each other. The effect of forces is intricately linked to the material properties of cells and their physical environment. Here a review is given of recent progress in our understanding of the role of forces in cell adhesion from the viewpoint of theoretical soft matter physics and in close relation to the relevant experiments.
    Review of Modern Physics 09/2013; 85(3). DOI:10.1103/RevModPhys.85.1327 · 29.60 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cells are exquisitely sensitive to the mechanical nature of their environment, including applied force and the stiffness of the extracellular matrix (ECM). Recent evidence has shown that these variables are critical regulators of diverse processes mediating embryonic development, adult tissue physiology, and many disease states, including cancer, atherosclerosis, and myopathies. Often, detection of mechanical stimuli is mediated by the structures that link cells that surround ECM, the focal adhesions (FAs). FAs are intrinsically force sensitive and display altered dynamics, structure, and composition in response to applied load. While much progress has been made in determining the proteins that localize to and regulate the formation of these structures, less is known about the role of tension across specific proteins in this process. A recently developed class of force-sensitive biosensors is enabling a greater understanding of the molecular bases of cellular mechanosensitivity and cell migration.
    Progress in molecular biology and translational science 08/2014; 126:3-24. DOI:10.1016/B978-0-12-394624-9.00001-4 · 3.49 Impact Factor
Show more