4.4 Article

Correlating nuclear morphology and external force with combined atomic force microscopy and light sheet imaging separates roles of chromatin and lamin A/C in nuclear mechanics

期刊

MOLECULAR BIOLOGY OF THE CELL
卷 31, 期 16, 页码 1788-1801

出版社

AMER SOC CELL BIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1091/mbc.E20-01-0073

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation (NSF) GRFP [DGE-1650116]
  2. Caroline H. and Thomas Royster Fellowship
  3. National Institutes of Health (NIH) [5T32GM-008570-19]
  4. Pathway to Independence Award NIHGMS [K99GM-123195]
  5. NSF (NSF/NIGMS) [1361375]
  6. NIH (NIBIB) [P41-EB002025]
  7. NIH

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nuclei are often under external stress, be it during migration through tight constrictions or compressive pressure by the actin cap, and the mechanical properties of nuclei govern their subsequent deformations. Both altered mechanical properties of nuclei and abnormal nuclear morphologies are hallmarks of a variety of disease states. Little work, however, has been done to link specific changes in nuclear shape to external forces. Here, we utilize a combined atomic force microscope and light sheet microscope to show SKOV3 nuclei exhibit a two-regime force response that correlates with changes in nuclear volume and surface area, allowing us to develop an empirical model of nuclear deformation. Our technique further decouples the roles of chromatin and lamin A/C in compression, showing they separately resist changes in nuclear volume and surface area, respectively; this insight was not previously accessible by Hertzian analysis. A two-material finite element model supports our conclusions. We also observed that chromatin decompaction leads to lower nuclear curvature under compression, which is important for maintaining nuclear compartmentalization and function. The demonstrated link between specific types of nuclear morphological change and applied force will allow researchers to better understand the stress on nuclei throughout various biological processes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据