Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29136638›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2017

A free-boundary model of a motile cell explains turning behavior.

Masoud Nickaeen, Igor L Novak, Stephanie Pulford, Aaron Rumack, Jamie Brandon, Boris M Slepchenko, Alex Mogilner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Nonlinear Stability in a Free Boundary Model of Active Locomotion.Archive for rational mechanics and analysis · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Tools for computational analysis of moving boundary problems in cellular mechanobiology.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Systems biology and medicine · 2020
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Masoud NickaeenRichard D. Berlin Center for Cell Analysis and Modeling, Department of Cell Biology, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT, United States of America.
Igor L NovakRichard D. Berlin Center for Cell Analysis and Modeling, Department of Cell Biology, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT, United States of America.
Stephanie PulfordCenter for Engineering Learning & Teaching, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States of America.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3296-2787
Aaron RumackDepartment of Computer Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, United States of America.
Jamie BrandonDepartment of Mathematics, Adrian College, Adrian, MI, United States of America.
Boris M SlepchenkoRichard D. Berlin Center for Cell Analysis and Modeling, Department of Cell Biology, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT, United States of America.
Alex MogilnerCourant Institute and Department of Biology, New York University, New York, NY, United States of America.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5302-2404

Funding

STRUCTUREU54GM064346 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA CHARLOTTESVILLE · PI IMPERIALI, BARBARA · 2001 to 2010
$74.9M
VIRTUAL FCSP41RR013186 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT SCH OF MED/DNT · PI LOEW, LESLIE M · 1998 to 2011
$14.2M
TR&D4 Spatial Modeling: Modeling Framework for Cell MotilityP41GM103313 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT SCH OF MED/DNT · PI LOEW, LESLIE M · 2012 to 2018
$9.7M
Modeling mitotic spindle assemblyR01GM068952 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS · PI MOGILNER, ALEXANDER · 2003 to 2014
$4.4M
NCRR NIH HHS P41 RR013186NIGMS NIH HHS P41 GM103313NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM068952NIGMS NIH HHS U54 GM064346
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To understand shapes and movements of cells undergoing lamellipodial motility, we systematically explore minimal free-boundary models of actin-myosin contractility consisting of the force-balance and myosin transport equations. The models account for isotropic contraction proportional to myosin density, viscous stresses in the actin network, and constant-strength viscous-like adhesion. The contraction generates a spatially graded centripetal actin flow, which in turn reinforces the contraction via myosin redistribution and causes retraction of the lamellipodial boundary. Actin protrusion at the boundary counters the retraction, and the balance of the protrusion and retraction shapes the lamellipodium. The model analysis shows that initiation of motility critically depends on three dimensionless parameter combinations, which represent myosin-dependent contractility, a characteristic viscosity-adhesion length, and a rate of actin protrusion. When the contractility is sufficiently strong, cells break symmetry and move steadily along either straight or circular trajectories, and the motile behavior is sensitive to conditions at the cell boundary. Scanning of a model parameter space shows that the contractile mechanism of motility supports robust cell turning in conditions where short viscosity-adhesion lengths and fast protrusion cause an accumulation of myosin in a small region at the cell rear, destabilizing the axial symmetry of a moving cell.

Indexed as

ActinsBiomechanical PhenomenaCell MovementCell ShapeModels, TheoreticalMyosinsPseudopodiaActinsMyosins

Identifiers

PMID29136638
PMCPMC5705165

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.