4.8 Article

Frequency-dependent transition in power-law rheological behavior of living cells

期刊

SCIENCE ADVANCES
卷 8, 期 18, 页码 -

出版社

AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abn6093

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [12122210, 12072252, 002479-00001]
  2. Nanyang Technological University
  3. Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Living cells exhibit diverse mechanical behaviors at different time scales. A self-similar hierarchical model is used in this study to capture the power-law rheological characteristics of cells in different frequency scales. The transition between low- and high-frequency scales is defined by a transition frequency based on cell's mechanical parameters. The differences in cytoskeletal properties of different cell types or states can be characterized by changes in mechanical parameters in the model.
Living cells are active viscoelastic materials exhibiting diverse mechanical behaviors at different time scales. However, dynamical rheological characteristics of cells in frequency range spanning many orders of magnitude, especially in high frequencies, remain poorly understood. Here, we show that a self-similar hierarchical model can capture cell's power-law rheological characteristics in different frequency scales. In low-frequency scales, the storage and loss moduli exhibit a weak power-law dependence on frequency with same exponent. In high-frequency scales, the storage modulus becomes a constant, while the loss modulus shows a power-law dependence on frequency with an exponent of 1.0. The transition between low- and high-frequency scales is defined by a transition frequency based on cell's mechanical parameters. The cytoskeletal differences of different cell types or states can be characterized by changes in mechanical parameters in the model. This study provides valuable insights into potentially using mechanics-based markers for cell classification and cancer diagnosis.

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

4.8
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