4.5 Article

Comparison of cellular strain with applied substrate strain in vitro

Journal

JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS
Volume 40, Issue 1, Pages 173-181

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2005.10.032

Keywords

texture correlation; tenocytes; equibiaxial strain; uniaxial strain

Funding

  1. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ARTHRITIS AND MUSCULOSKELETAL AND SKIN DISEASES [R01AR038121] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  2. NIAMS NIH HHS [AR38121] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Strain magnitudes within tenocytes undergoing substrate tensile strain are not well defined. It was hypothesized that strain magnitudes at the cellular level would reflect those of the applied substrate (equibiaxial or uniaxial) strain. A vacuum-operated device was used to apply equibiaxial or uniaxial tension to a flexible substrate upon which tenocytes were cultured in monolayer. Images of tenocytes labeled with Fura-2, to detect free intracellular calcium ions, and MitoFluor (TM) Green, to detect mitochondria, were taken prior to strain and for 20min during application of static strain. A custom-written, texture correlation program computed strain magnitudes in the cell based on the change in pixel pattern displacements between images of non-strained and strained cells. On average.. cellular strain was approximately 37 + 8% and 63 + 11% of the applied equibiaxial and uniaxial substrate strain, respectively. The largest cell strains were detected in cells oriented parallel to the direction of applied uniaxial tensile strain. However, strain magnitudes within a cell were heterogeneous. The variance in strain magnitude within and among tenocytes is dependent on cell orientation, cell stiffness, cytoskeleton organization, subcellular organelles, or placement and type of cell-substrate contacts. Results of the present study indicate that cultured tenocytes experience a moderate fraction of the applied substrate strain. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available