4.5 Article

An extended modeling of the micropipette aspiration experiment for the characterization of the Young's modulus and Poisson's ratio of adherent thin biological samples: Numerical and experimental studies

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS
卷 39, 期 9, 页码 1677-1685

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2005.04.026

关键词

soft tissue; finite element analysis; mechanical properties; mechanical model

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The micropipette aspiration (MA) experiment remains a quite widely used micromanipulation technique for quantifying the elastic modulus of cells and, less frequently, of other biological samples. However, moduli estimations derived from MA experiments are only valid if the probed sample is non-adherent to the rigid substrate. This study extends this standard formulation by taking into account the influence of the sample adhesion. Using a finite element analysis of the sample aspiration into the micropipette, we derived a new expression of the aspirated length for linear elastic materials. Our results establish that (i) below a critical value, the thickness It of the probed sample must be considered to get an accurate value of its Young's modulus (ii) this critical value depends both on the Poisson's ratio and on the sample adhesivity. Additionally, we propose a novel method which allows the computation of the intrinsic Young's modulus of the adherent probed sample from its measured apparent elasticity modulus. Thanks to the set of computational graphs we derived from our theoretical analysis, we successfully validate this method by experiments performed on polyacrylamide gels. Interestingly, the original procedure we proposed allows a simultaneous quantification of the Young's modulus and of the Poisson's ratio of the adherent gel. Thus, our revisited analysis of MA experiments extends the application domain of this technique, while contributing to decrease the dispersion of elastic modulus values obtained by this method. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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