4.8 Article

Endocytic reawakening of motility in jammed epithelia

期刊

NATURE MATERIALS
卷 16, 期 5, 页码 587-+

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/NMAT4848

关键词

-

资金

  1. Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro (AIRC) [10168, 18621]
  2. MIUR (the Italian Ministry of University and Scientific Research)
  3. Italian Ministry of Health
  4. Ricerca Finalizzata [RF0235844]
  5. Worldwide Cancer Research [AICR-14-0335]
  6. European Research Council [268836, StG-CoG-616480]
  7. Italian Ministry of Education and Research, Futuro in Ricerca Project ANISOFT [RBFR125H0M]
  8. Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness [BFU2012-38146]
  9. Generalitat de Catalunya [2014-SGR-927]
  10. Fondazione Umberto Veronesi
  11. AIRC fellowship
  12. ETH-grant [ETH-12 15-1]
  13. European Research Council (ERC) [268836] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)
  14. ICREA Funding Source: Custom

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dynamics of epithelial monolayers has recently been interpreted in terms of a jamming or rigidity transition. How cells control such phase transitions is, however, unknown. Here we show that RAB5A, a key endocytic protein, is sufficient to induce large-scale, coordinated motility over tens of cells, and ballistic motion in otherwise kinetically arrested monolayers. This is linked to increased traction forces and to the extension of cell protrusions, which align with local velocity. Molecularly, impairing endocytosis, macropinocytosis or increasing fluid efflux abrogates RAB5A-induced collective motility. A simple model based on mechanical junctional tension and an active cell reorientation mechanism for the velocity of self-propelled cells identifies regimes of monolayer dynamics that explain endocytic reawakening of locomotion in terms of a combination of large-scale directed migration and local unjamming. These changes in multicellular dynamics enable collectives to migrate under physical constraints and may be exploited by tumours for interstitial dissemination.

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