Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31178602›Full record

ArticleJournal of the mechanics and physics of solids2016

Cells as strain-cued automata.

Brian N Cox, Malcolm L Snead

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the mechanics and physics of solids, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Brian N CoxArachne Consulting, Sherman Oaks, CA 91423, USA.
Malcolm L SneadCenter for Craniofacial Molecular Biology, Ostrow School of Dentistry of USC, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA.

Funding

DETERMINATION AND EXPRESSION OF AMELOGENIN GENE PRODUCTSR01DE006988 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI SNEAD, MALCOLM L. · 1985 to 2012
$4.4M
CELL AND GENETICS APPROACHES TO ENAMEL BIOMIMETICSR01DE013045 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI SNEAD, MALCOLM L. · 1998 to 2014
$1.9M
NIDCR NIH HHS R01 DE006988NIDCR NIH HHS R01 DE013045
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We argue in favor of representing living cells as automata and review demonstrations that autonomous cells can form patterns by responding to local variations in the strain fields that arise from their individual or collective motions. An autonomous cell's response to strain stimuli is assumed to be effected by internally-generated, internally-powered forces, which generally move the cell in directions other than those implied by external energy gradients. Evidence of cells acting as strain-cued automata have been inferred from patterns observed in nature and from experiments conducted in vitro. Simulations that mimic particular cases of pattern forming share the idealization that cells are assumed to pass information among themselves solely via mechanical boundary conditions, i.e., the tractions and displacements present at their membranes. This assumption opens three mechanisms for pattern formation in large cell populations: wavelike behavior, kinematic feedback in cell motility that can lead to sliding and rotational patterns, and directed migration during invasions. Wavelike behavior among ameloblast cells during amelogenesis (the formation of dental enamel) has been inferred from enamel microstructure, while strain waves in populations of epithelial cells have been observed in vitro. One hypothesized kinematic feedback mechanism, "enhanced shear motility", accounts successfully for the spontaneous formation of layered patterns during amelogenesis in the mouse incisor. Directed migration is exemplified by a theory of invader cells that sense and respond to the strains they themselves create in the host population as they invade it: analysis shows that the strain fields contain positional information that could aid the formation of cell network structures, stabilizing the slender geometry of branches and helping govern the frequency of branch bifurcation and branch coalescence (the formation of closed networks). In simulations of pattern formation in homogeneous populations and network formation by invaders, morphological outcomes are governed by the ratio of the rates of two competing time dependent processes, one a migration velocity and the other a relaxation velocity related to the propagation of strain information. Relaxation velocities are approximately constant for different species and organs, whereas cell migration rates vary by three orders of magnitude. We conjecture that developmental processes use rapid cell migration to achieve certain outcomes, and slow migration to achieve others. We infer from analysis of host relaxation during network formation that a transition exists in the mechanical response of a host cell from animate to inanimate behavior when its strain changes at a rate that exceeds 10

Indexed as

AmeloblastsAngiogenesisAutomatonDecussationEnamelInnervationKinematicsMigrationMorphogenesisPatterningStrain cueStrain stimulusWaves

Identifiers

PMID31178602
PMCPMC6550492
OpenAlexW201503990

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.