Book contents
- Integrative Mechanobiology
- Integrative Mechanobiology
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Preface
- Part I Micro-nano techniques in cell mechanobiology
- 1 Nanotechnologies and FRET imaging in live cells
- 2 Electron microscopy and three-dimensional single-particle analysis as tools for understanding the structural basis of mechanobiology
- 3 Stretchable micropost array cytometry
- 4 Microscale generation of dynamic forces in cell culture systems
- 5 Multiscale topographical approaches for cell mechanobiology studies
- 6 Hydrogels with dynamically tunable properties
- 7 Microengineered tools for studying cell migration in electric fields
- 8 Laser ablation to investigate cell and tissue mechanics in vivo
- 9 Computational image analysis techniques for cell mechanobiology
- 10 Micro- and nanotools to probe cancer cell mechanics and mechanobiology
- 11 Stimuli-responsive polymeric substrates for cell-matrix mechanobiology
- Part II Recent progress in cell mechanobiology
- Index
- References
4 - Microscale generation of dynamic forces in cell culture systems
from Part I - Micro-nano techniques in cell mechanobiology
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 November 2015
Book contents
- Integrative Mechanobiology
- Integrative Mechanobiology
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Preface
- Part I Micro-nano techniques in cell mechanobiology
- 1 Nanotechnologies and FRET imaging in live cells
- 2 Electron microscopy and three-dimensional single-particle analysis as tools for understanding the structural basis of mechanobiology
- 3 Stretchable micropost array cytometry
- 4 Microscale generation of dynamic forces in cell culture systems
- 5 Multiscale topographical approaches for cell mechanobiology studies
- 6 Hydrogels with dynamically tunable properties
- 7 Microengineered tools for studying cell migration in electric fields
- 8 Laser ablation to investigate cell and tissue mechanics in vivo
- 9 Computational image analysis techniques for cell mechanobiology
- 10 Micro- and nanotools to probe cancer cell mechanics and mechanobiology
- 11 Stimuli-responsive polymeric substrates for cell-matrix mechanobiology
- Part II Recent progress in cell mechanobiology
- Index
- References
Summary
Dynamic mechanical forces play a critical role in modulating cellular function, and inclusion of these extracellular stimuli in culture systems may improve the relevance and utility of biological results. In this work, we discuss recent advances made by our research group in applying dynamically controlled mechanical stimuli to cells cultured in 2-D and 3-D arrayed environments. Advantages in throughput and precision arising from microengineering such systems are demonstrated, with illustrative examples of potential biological applications. Engineering challenges associated with building these culture systems are explored, and the design and fabrication strategies that we have developed are discussed. Finally, the ability to incorporate additional sensing technologies into these dynamic screening platforms is explored.
Information
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Integrative MechanobiologyMicro- and Nano- Techniques in Cell Mechanobiology, pp. 47 - 68Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2015
References
Anderson, D. G. et al. (2005). “Biomaterial microarrays: rapid, microscale screening of polymer–cell interaction.” Biomaterials 26(23): 4892–4897.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anderson, J. R. et al. (2000). “Fabrication of topologically complex three-dimensional microfluidic systems in PDMS by rapid prototyping.” Analytical Chemistry 72(14): 3158–3164.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bellin, R. M. et al. (2009). “Defining the role of syndecan-4 in mechanotransduction using surface-modification approaches.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106(52): 22102–22107.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berthier, E., Young, E. W. K., and Beebe, D.. (2012). “Engineers are from PDMS-land, Biologists are from Polystyrenia.” Lab on a Chip 12(7): 1224–1237.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bongaerts, J. H. H., Fourtouni, K., and Stokes, J. R.. (2007). “Soft-tribology: lubrication in a compliant PDMS–PDMS contact.” Tribology International 40(10–12): 1531–1542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, T. D. (2000). “Techniques for mechanical stimulation of cells in vitro: a review.” J Biomech 33(1): 3–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, J. H. and Simmons, C. A.. (2011). “Cell-matrix interactions in the pathobiology of calcific aortic valve disease: critical roles for matricellular, matricrine, and matrix mechanics cues.” Circ Res 108(12): 1510–1524.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dennes, T. J. and Schwartz, J.. (2008). “Controlling cell adhesion on polyurethanes.” Soft Matter 4(1): 86–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duffy, D. C. et al. (1998). “Rapid prototyping of microfluidic systems in poly(dimethylsiloxane).” Analytical Chemistry 70(23): 4974–4984.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figallo, E. et al. (2007). “Micro-bioreactor array for controlling cellular microenvironments.” Lab on a Chip 7(6): 710–719.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Flaim, C. J., Chien, S., and Bhatia, S. N.. (2005). “An extracellular matrix microarray for probing cellular differentiation.” Nature Methods 2(2): 119–125.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gómez-Sjöberg, R. et al. (2007). “Versatile, fully automated, microfluidic cell culture system.” Analytical Chemistry 79(22): 8557–8563.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gopalan, S. M. et al. (2003). “Anisotropic stretch-induced hypertrophy in neonatal ventricular myocytes micropatterned on deformable elastomers.” Biotechnology and Bioengineering 81(5): 578–587.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hinz, B. (2010). “The myofibroblast: paradigm for a mechanically active cell.” Journal of Biomechanics 43(1): 146–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holick, M. F. (2000). “Microgravity-induced bone loss—will it limit human space exploration?” The Lancet 355(9215): 1569–1570.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huang, J.-W. et al. (2013). “Interaction between lung cancer cell and myofibroblast influenced by cyclic tensile strain.” Lab on a Chip 13(6): 1114–1120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huebsch, N. et al. (2010). “Harnessing traction-mediated manipulation of the cell/matrix interface to control stem-cell fate.” Nature Materials 9: 518–526.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huh, D. et al. (2010). “Reconstituting organ-level lung functions on a chip.” Science 328(5986): 1662–1668.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hwang, N. S. et al. (2006). “Effects of three-dimensional culture and growth factors on the chondrogenic differentiation of murine embryonic stem cells.” Stem Cells 24: 284–291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jo, B. H. et al. (2000). “Three-dimensional micro-channel fabrication in polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) elastomer.” Journal of Microelectromechanical Systems 9(1): 76–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, T. K. and Jeong, O. C.. (2012). “Fabrication of a pneumatically-driven tensile stimulator.” Microelectronic Engineering 98: 715–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kong, H. J. et al. (2005). “Non-viral gene delivery regulated by stiffness of cell adhesion substrates.” Nature Materials 4(6): 460–464.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, J. N., Park, C. and Whitesides, G. M.. (2003). “Solvent compatibility of poly(dimethylsiloxane)-based microfluidic devices.” Analytical Chemistry 75(23): 6544–6554.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, S. W. and Lee, S. S.. (2008). “Shrinkage ratio of PDMS and its alignment method for the wafer level process.” Microsystem Technologies 14(2): 205–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKenna, D. A. et al. (1998). “Extracellular signal-regulated kinase and c-Jun NH2-terminal kinase activation by mechanical stretch is integrin-dependent and matrix-specific in rat cardiac fibroblasts.” Journal of Clinical Investigation 101(2): 301–310.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacQueen, L. et al. (2012). “Miniaturized platform with on-chip strain sensors for compression testing of arrayed materials.” Lab on a Chip 12(20): 4178–4184.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McBeath, R. et al. (2004). “Cell shape, cytoskeletal tension, and RhoA regulate stem cell lineage commitment.” Developmental Cell 6(4): 483–495.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moraes, C. et al. (2011). “Semi-confined compression of microfabricated polymerized biomaterial constructs.” Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering 21, 054014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moraes, C. et al. (2012). “Organs-on-a-Chip: A Focus on Compartmentalized Microdevices.” Annals of Biomedical Engineering 40(6): 1211–1227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moraes, C. et al. (2013). “Microdevice array-based identification of distinct mechanobiological response profiles in layer-specific valve interstitial cells.” Integrative Biology 5, 673–680.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moraes, C., Chen, J.-H., et al. (2010). “Microfabricated arrays for high-throughput screening of cellular response to cyclic substrate deformation.” Lab on a Chip 10, 227.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moraes, C., Kagoma, Y. K., et al. (2009). “Integrating polyurethane culture substrates into poly(dimethylsiloxane) microdevices.” Biomaterials 30(28): 5241–5250.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moraes, C., Wang, G. H., et al. (2010). A microfabricated platform for high-throughput unconfined compression of micropatterned biomaterial arrays. Biomaterials 31(3): 577–584.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moraes, C., Sun, Y., and Simmons, C. A. (2009). “Solving the shrinkage-induced PDMS alignment registration issue in multilayer soft lithography.” Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering 19, 065015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moraes, C., Sun, Y., and Simmons, C. A.. (2010). “Microfabricated platforms for mechanically dynamic cell culture. journal of visualized experiments.” J Vis Exp 46: e2224.Google Scholar
Moraes, C., Sun, Y., and Simmons, C. A.. (2011). “(Micro)managing the mechanical microenvironment.” Integrative Biology 3: 959–971.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mukundan, V., Nelson, W. J., and Pruitt, B. L.. (2012). “Microactuator device for integrated measurement of epithelium mechanics.” Biomedical Microdevices 15(1): 117–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Regehr, K. J. et al. (2009). “Biological implications of polydimethylsiloxane-based microfluidic cell culture.” Lab on a Chip 9: 2132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scuor, N. et al. (2006). “Design of a novel MEMS platform for the biaxial stimulation of living cells.” Biomedical Microdevices 8(3): 239–246.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shimizu, K. et al. (2011). “Development of a biochip with serially connected pneumatic balloons for cell-stretching culture.” Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical 156(1): 486–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmons, C. S. et al. (2011). “Integrated strain array for cellular mechanobiology studies.” J Micromech Microeng 21(5): 54016–54025.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simon, C. G. and Lin-Gibson, S.. (2011). “Combinatorial and high-throughput screening of biomaterials.” Advanced Materials 23(3): 369–387.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smalley, K. S. M., Lioni, M., and Herlyn, M.. (2006). “Life isn’t flat: taking cancer biology to the next dimension.” In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology – Animal 42: 242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sniadecki, N. J. (2010). “Minireview: a tiny touch: activation of cell signaling pathways with magnetic nanoparticles.” Endocrinology 151(2): 451–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suhir, E., 1991. Structural analysis in microelectronic and fiber-optic systems. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tan, W. et al. (2008). “Development and evaluation of microdevices for studying anisotropic biaxial cyclic stretch on cells.” Biomed Microdevices 10(6): 869–882.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tomasek, J. J. et al. (2002). “Myofibroblasts and mechano-regulation of connective tissue remodelling.” Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 3(5): 349–363.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Unger, M. A. et al. (2000). “Monolithic microfabricated valves and pumps by multilayer soft lithography.” Science 288(5463): 113–116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Volder, M. D. and Reynaerts, D.. (2010). “Pneumatic and hydraulic microactuators: a review.” Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering 20(4): 043001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weaver, V. M. et al. (1997). “Reversion of the malignant phenotype of human breast cells in three-dimensional culture and in vivo by integrin blocking antibodies.” The Journal of Cell Biology 137(1): 231–245.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wipff, P.-J. et al. (2009). “The covalent attachment of adhesion molecules to silicone membranes for cell stretching applications.” Biomaterials 30(9): 1781–1789.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yip, C. Y. Y. and Simmons, C. A.. (2011). “The aortic valve microenvironment and its role in calcific aortic valve disease.” Cardiovascular Pathology 20(3): 177–182.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zandstra, P. W. (2004). “The opportunity of stem cell bioengineering.” Biotechnology and Bioengineering 88(3): 263–263.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhou, J. and Niklason, L. E.. (2012). “Microfluidic artificial ‘vessels’ for dynamic mechanical stimulation of mesenchymal stem cells.” Integrative Biology 4(12): 1487–1497.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Accessibility standard: Unknown
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown
and may be updated in the future.