ArticlePloS one2014
Persistent cellular motion control and trapping using mechanotactic signaling.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Differential Roles of Actin Crosslinking Proteins Filamin and α-Actinin in Shear Flow-Induced Migration ofFrontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021Article
- Hydrodynamics in Cell Studies.Chemical reviews · 2018Review
- Interplay between motility and cell-substratum adhesion in amoeboid cells.Biomicrofluidics · 2015Article
- Genetic control of morphogenesis in Dictyostelium.Developmental biology · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chemotactic signaling and the associated directed cell migration have been extensively studied owing to their importance in emergent processes of cellular aggregation. In contrast, mechanotactic signaling has been relatively overlooked despite its potential for unique ways to artificially signal cells with the aim to effectively gain control over their motile behavior. The possibility of mimicking cellular mechanotactic signals offers a fascinating novel strategy to achieve targeted cell delivery for in vitro tissue growth if proven to be effective with mammalian cells. Using (i) optimal level of extracellular calcium ([Ca(2+)]ext = 3 mM) we found, (ii) controllable fluid shear stress of low magnitude (σ < 0.5 Pa), and (iii) the ability to swiftly reverse flow direction (within one second), we are able to successfully signal Dictyostelium discoideum amoebae and trigger migratory responses with heretofore unreported control and precision. Specifically, we are able to systematically determine the mechanical input signal required to achieve any predetermined sequences of steps including straightforward motion, reversal and trapping. The mechanotactic cellular trapping is achieved for the first time and is associated with a stalling frequency of 0.06 ~ 0.1 Hz for a reversing direction mechanostimulus, above which the cells are effectively trapped while maintaining a high level of directional sensing. The value of this frequency is very close to the stalling frequency recently reported for chemotactic cell trapping [Meier B, et al. (2011) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108:11417-11422], suggesting that the limiting factor may be the slowness of the internal chemically-based motility apparatus.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.