Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vvkck Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T09:58:56.743Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

1 - Introduction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2014

Roger D. Kamm
Affiliation:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Mohammad R. K. Mofrad
Affiliation:
University of California, Berkeley
Mohammad R. K. Mofrad
Affiliation:
University of California, Berkeley
Roger D. Kamm
Affiliation:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Get access

Summary

Mechanotransduction – Historical Development

Julius Wolff, a nineteenth-century anatomist, first observed that bone will adapt to the stresses it experiences and is capable of remodeling if the state of stress changes. This became known as Wolff’s Law and stands today as perhaps the earliest recognized example of the ability of living tissues to sense mechanical stress and respond by tissue remodeling (see Chapter 17 for a detailed historical review). More recently, the term “mechanotransduction” has been introduced to represent this process, often including the sensation of stress, its transduction into a biochemical signal, and the sequence of biological responses it produces. Here we use mechanotransduction in a somewhat more restricted sense, and specifically use it for the process of stress sensing itself, transducing a mechanical force into a cascade of biochemical signals.

Since Wolff’s early insight, the influence of mechanical force or stress has become increasingly recognized as one of the primary and essential factors controlling biological function. We now appreciate that the sensation of stress occurs at cellular or even subcellular scales, and that nearly every tissue and every cell type in the body is capable of sensing and responding to mechanical stimuli. Another manifestation of mechanotransduction is known as Murray’s Law [1, 2], which states that the flow rate passing through a given artery scales with the third power of its radius. This has been widely recognized to be a response of the arterial endothelium and the smooth muscle cells to remodel the arterial wall to maintain a nearly constant level of hemodynamic shear stress (at ~ 1 Pa), leading to the third power relationship. One aspect of this response is the alignment of endothelial cells in the direction of stress, first observed in studies of arterial wall morphology [4], and later vividly demonstrated in controlled in vitro experiments [5]. Other biological factors, such as soft tissue remodeling [6], changes in the thickness of the arterial wall in response to circumferential stress [7], calcification in the heart valve tissue in response to pathological solid and fluid mechanical patterns, and bone loss in microgravity [8, 9], have all been found to be influenced by mechanical stress.

Type
Chapter
Information
Cellular Mechanotransduction
Diverse Perspectives from Molecules to Tissues
, pp. 1 - 19
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Kamiya, A. and Takahashi, T., Quantitative assessments of morphological and functional properties of biological trees based on their fractal nature. J Appl Physiol, 2007. 102(6): 2315–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reneman, R. S. and Hoeks, A. P., Wall shear stress as measured in vivo: Consequences for the design of the arterial system. Med Biol Eng Comput, 2008. 46(5): 499–507.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cheng, C., et al., Large variations in absolute wall shear stress levels within one species and between species. Atherosclerosis, 2007. 195(2): 225–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nerem, R. M., Levesque, M. J., and Cornhill, J. F., Vascular endothelial morphology as an indicator of the pattern of blood flow. J Biomech Eng, 1981. 103(3): 172–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dewey, C. F., et al., The dynamic response of vascular endothelial cells to fluid shear stress. J Biomech Eng, 1981. 103(3): 177–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Driessen, N. J., et al., Remodelling of continuously distributed collagen fibres in soft connective tissues. J Biomech, 2003. 36(8): 1151–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Price, R. J. and Skalak, T. C., Circumferential wall stress as a mechanism for arteriolar rarefaction and proliferation in a network model. Microvasc Res, 1994. 47(2): 188–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yegorov, A. D., Kakurin, L. I., and Nefyodov, Y. G., Effects of an 18-day flight on the human body. Life Sci Space Res, 1972. 10: 57–60.Google ScholarPubMed
Neuman, W. F., Calcium metabolism in space flight. Life Sci Space Res, 1970. 8: 309–15.Google ScholarPubMed
Simmons, C. A., et al., Cyclic strain enhances matrix mineralization by adult human mesenchymal stem cells via the extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK1/2) signaling pathway. J Biomech, 2003. 36(8): 1087–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmelter, M., et al., Embryonic stem cells utilize reactive oxygen species as transducers of mechanical strain-induced cardiovascular differentiation. Faseb J, 2006. 20(8): 1182–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Discher, D. E., Janmey, P., and Wang, Y. L., Tissue cells feel and respond to the stiffness of their substrate. Science, 2005. 310(5751): 1139–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hollander, W., Role of hypertension in atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease. Am J Cardiol, 1976. 38(6): 786–800.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nerem, R. M., Vascular fluid mechanics, the arterial wall, and atherosclerosis. J Biomech Eng, 1992. 114(3): 274–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schwartz, C. J., et al., Pathophysiology of the atherogenic process. Am J Cardiol, 1989. 64(13): 23G–30G.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jo, H., et al., Endothelial albumin permeability is shear dependent, time dependent, and reversible. Am J Physiol, 1991. 260(6 Pt 2): H1992–6.Google ScholarPubMed
Friedman, M. H. and Fry, D. L., Arterial permeability dynamics and vascular disease. Atherosclerosis, 1993. 104(1–2): 189–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shieh, A. C. and Athanasiou, K. A., Principles of cell mechanics for cartilage tissue engineering. Ann Biomed Eng, 2003. 31(1): 1–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kisiday, J. D., et al., Effects of dynamic compressive loading on chondrocyte biosynthesis in self-assembling peptide scaffolds. J Biomech, 2004. 37(5): 595–604.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ressler, B., et al., Molecular responses of rat tracheal epithelial cells to transmembrane pressure. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol, 2000. 278(6): L1264–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swartz, M. A., et al., Mechanical stress is communicated between different cell types to elicit matrix remodeling. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2001. 98(11): 6180–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waters, C. M., et al., Cellular biomechanics in the lung. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol, 2002. 283(3): L503–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Delmas, P., Polycystins: From mechanosensation to gene regulation. Cell, 2004. 118(2): 145–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ingber, D. E., Mechanobiology and diseases of mechanotransduction. Ann Med, 2003. 35(8): 564–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dobrin, P. B., Mechanical properties of arteries. Physiol Rev, 1978. 58(2): 397–460.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tschumperlin, D. J., et al., Mechanotransduction through growth-factor shedding into the extracellular space. Nature, 2004. 429(6987): 83–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, Y., et al., A model for the role of integrins in flow induced mechanotransduction in osteocytes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2007. 104(40): 15941–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barbee, K. A., et al., Subcellular distribution of shear stress at the surface of flow-aligned and nonaligned endothelial monolayers. Am J Physiol, 1995. 268(4 Pt 2): H1765–72.Google ScholarPubMed
Weinbaum, S., et al., Mechanotransduction and flow across the endothelial glycocalyx. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2003. 100(13): 7988–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mack, P. J., et al., Force-induced focal adhesion translocation: Effects of force amplitude and frequency. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol, 2004. 287(4): C954–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salwen, S. A., et al., Three-dimensional changes of the cytoskeleton of vascular endothelial cells exposed to sustained hydrostatic pressure. Med Biol Eng Comput, 1998. 36(4): 520–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schwartz, E. A., et al., Exposure of human vascular endothelial cells to sustained hydrostatic pressure stimulates proliferation. Involvement of the alphaV integrins. Circ Res, 1999. 84(3): 315–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hishikawa, K., et al., Pressure promotes DNA synthesis in rat cultured vascular smooth muscle cells. J Clin Invest, 1994. 93(5): 1975–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muller, H. J. and Galla, H. J., Pressure variation of the lateral diffusion in lipid bilayer membranes. Biochim Biophys Acta, 1983. 733(2): 291–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chien, S., Mechanotransduction and endothelial cell homeostasis: The wisdom of the cell. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, 2007. 292(3): H1209–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lehoux, S., Castier, Y., and Tedgui, A., Molecular mechanisms of the vascular responses to haemodynamic forces. J Intern Med, 2006. 259(4): 381–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liedert, A., et al., Signal transduction pathways involved in mechanotransduction in bone cells. Biochem Biophys Res Commun, 2006. 349(1): 1–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hu, S. and Wang, N., Control of stress propagation in the cytoplasm by prestress and loading frequency. Mol Cell Biomech, 2006. 3(2): 49–60.Google ScholarPubMed
Moe, P. and Blount, P., Assessment of potential stimuli for mechano-dependent gating of MscL: Effects of pressure, tension, and lipid headgroups. Biochemistry, 2005. 44(36): 12239–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gullingsrud, J., Kosztin, D., and Schulten, K., Structural determinants of MscL gating studied by molecular dynamics simulations. Biophys J, 2001. 80(5): 2074–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bilston, L. E. and Mylvaganam, K., Molecular simulations of the large conductance mechanosensitive (MscL) channel under mechanical loading. FEBS Lett, 2002. 512(1–3): 185–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kung, C., A possible unifying principle for mechanosensation. Nature, 2005. 436(7051): 647–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martinac, B., Mechanosensitive ion channels: Molecules of mechanotransduction. J Cell Sci, 2004. 117(Pt 12): 2449–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Perozo, E., et al., Open channel structure of MscL and the gating mechanism of mechanosensitive channels. Nature, 2002. 418(6901): 942–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barakat, A. I., Lieu, D. K., and Gojova, A., Secrets of the code: Do vascular endothelial cells use ion channels to decipher complex flow signals?Biomaterials, 2006. 27(5): 671–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pahakis, M. Y., et al., The role of endothelial glycocalyx components in mechanotransduction of fluid shear stress. Biochem Biophys Res Commun, 2007. 355(1): 228–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gudi, S., Nolan, J. P., and Frangos, J. A., Modulation of GTPase activity of G proteins by fluid shear stress and phospholipid composition. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1998. 95(5): 2515–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Butler, P. J., et al., Shear stress induces a time- and position-dependent increase in endothelial cell membrane fluidity. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol, 2001. 280(4): C962–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Axelrod, D., Lateral motion of membrane proteins and biological function. J Membr Biol, 1983. 75(1): 1–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Czarny, M. and Schnitzer, J. E., Neutral sphingomyelinase inhibitor scyphostatin prevents and ceramide mimics mechanotransduction in vascular endothelium. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, 2004. 287(3): H1344–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sawada, Y. and Sheetz, M. P., Force transduction by Triton cytoskeletons. J Cell Biol, 2002. 156(4): 609–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, Y., et al., Visualizing the mechanical activation of Src. Nature, 2005. 434(7036): 1040–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, C. P., et al., Forced unfolding of proteins within cells. Science, 2007. 317(5838): 663–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mochizuki, S., et al., Role of hyaluronic acid glycosaminoglycans in shear-induced endothelium-derived nitric oxide release. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, 2003. 285(2): H722–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Florian, J. A., et al., Heparan sulfate proteoglycan is a mechanosensor on endothelial cells. Circ Res, 2003. 93(10): e136–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Odde, D. J., et al., Microtubule bending and breaking in living fibroblast cells. J Cell Sci, 1999. 112(Pt 19): 3283–8.Google ScholarPubMed
Maniotis, A. J., Chen, C. S., and Ingber, D. E., Demonstration of mechanical connections between integrins, cytoskeletal filaments, and nucleoplasm that stabilize nuclear structure. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1997. 94(3): 849–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Deguchi, S., et al., Flow-induced hardening of endothelial nucleus as an intracellular stress-bearing organelle. J Biomech, 2005. 38(9): 1751–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brower-Toland, B. D., et al., Mechanical disruption of individual nucleosomes reveals a reversible multistage release of DNA. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2002. 99(4): 1960–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gao, M., et al., Identifying unfolding intermediates of FN-III(10) by steered molecular dynamics. J Mol Biol, 2002. 323(5): 939–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ortiz, V., et al., Unfolding a linker between helical repeats. J Mol Biol, 2005. 349(3): 638–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, S. E., Kamm, R. D., and Mofrad, M. R., Force-induced activation of talin and its possible role in focal adhesion mechanotransduction. J Biomech, 2007. 40(9): 2096–106.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hytonen, V. P. and Vogel, V., How force might activate talin’s vinculin binding sites: SMD reveals a structural mechanism. PLoS Comput Biol, 2008. 4(2): e24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Munevar, S., Wang, Y., and Dembo, M., Traction force microscopy of migrating normal and H-ras transformed 3T3 fibroblasts. Biophys J, 2001. 80(4): 1744–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Butler, J. P., et al., Traction fields, moments, and strain energy that cells exert on their surroundings. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol, 2002. 282(3): C595–605.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Balaban, N. Q., et al., Force and focal adhesion assembly: A close relationship studied using elastic micropatterned substrates. Nat Cell Biol, 2001. 3(5): 466–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tan, J. L., et al., Cells lying on a bed of microneedles: An approach to isolate mechanical force. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2003. 100(4): 1484–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sheetz, M. P., Sable, J. E., and Dobereiner, H. G., Continuous membrane-cytoskeleton adhesion requires continuous accommodation to lipid and cytoskeleton dynamics. Ann Rev Biophys Biomol Struct, 2006. 35: 417–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dai, J., et al., Myosin I contributes to the generation of resting cortical tension. Biophys J, 1999. 77(2): 1168–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mills, J. P., et al., Effect of plasmodial RESA protein on deformability of human red blood cells harboring Plasmodium falciparum. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2007. 104(22): 9213–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Suresh, S., Biomechanics and biophysics of cancer cells. Acta Biomater, 2007. 3(4): 413–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hudspeth, A. J., How the ear’s works work: Mechanoelectrical transduction and amplification by hair cells. C R Biol, 2005. 328(2): 155–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
You, L., Cowin, S. C., Schaffler, M. B., and Weinbaum, S., A model for strain amplification in the actin cytoskeleton of osteocytes due to fluid drag on pericellur matrix. J Biomech, 2001. 34(11): 1375–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gummer, A. W., Hemmert, W., and Zenner, H. P., Resonant tectorial membrane motion in the inner ear: Its crucial role in frequency tuning. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1996. 93(16): 8727–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kolahi, K. S. and Mofrad, M. R., Molecular mechanics of filamin’s rod domain. Biophys J, 2008. 94(3): 1075–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carrion-Vazquez, M., Oberhauser, A. F., Fisher, T. E., Marszalek, P. E., Li, H., and Fernandez, J. M., Mechanical design of proteins studied by single-molecule force spectroscopy and protein engineering. Prog Biophys Mol Biol, 2000. 74(1–2): 63–91. Review.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rizzo, V., Sung, A., Oh, P., and Schnitzer, J. E., Rapid mechanotransduction in situ at the luminal cell surface of vascular endothelium and its caveolae. J Biol Chem, 1998. 273(41): 26323–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×