Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32943055›Full record

ArticleJournal of nanobiotechnology2020

Nanomechanical properties of enucleated cells: contribution of the nucleus to the passive cell mechanics.

Yuri M Efremov, Svetlana L Kotova, Anastasia A Akovantseva, Peter S Timashev

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of nanobiotechnology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yuri M EfremovInstitute for Regenerative Medicine, Sechenov University, 8 Trubetskaya St., Moscow, 119991, Russia. efremov.ym@sechenov.ru.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7040-253X
Svetlana L KotovaInstitute for Regenerative Medicine, Sechenov University, 8 Trubetskaya St., Moscow, 119991, Russia.
Anastasia A AkovantsevaInstitute of Photon Technologies of Federal Scientific Research Centre "Crystallography and Photonics" of Russian Academy of Sciences, Pionerskaya 2, Troitsk, Moscow, 108840, Russia.
Peter S TimashevInstitute for Regenerative Medicine, Sechenov University, 8 Trubetskaya St., Moscow, 119991, Russia.
Russian Academy of Sciences · RUSechenov University · RU

Funding

Council on grants of the President of the Russian Federation grant of the President of the Russian Federation for young scientists MK-1613.2020.7Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation Russian academic excellence project "5-100"Russian Science Foundation grant No. 19-79-00354
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe nucleus, besides its functions in the gene maintenance and regulation, plays a significant role in the cell mechanosensitivity and mechanotransduction. It is the largest cellular organelle that is often considered as the stiffest cell part as well. Interestingly, the previous studies have revealed that the nucleus might be dispensable for some of the cell properties, like polarization and 1D and 2D migration. Here, we studied how the nanomechanical properties of cells, as measured using nanomechanical mapping by atomic force microscopy (AFM), were affected by the removal of the nucleus.

methodsThe mass enucleation procedure was employed to obtain cytoplasts (enucleated cells) and nucleoplasts (nuclei surrounded by plasma membrane) of two cell lines, REF52 fibroblasts and HT1080 fibrosarcoma cells. High-resolution viscoelastic mapping by AFM was performed to compare the mechanical properties of normal cells, cytoplasts, and nucleoplast. The absence or presence of the nucleus was confirmed with fluorescence microscopy, and the actin cytoskeleton structure was assessed with confocal microscopy.

resultsSurprisingly, we did not find the softening of cytoplasts relative to normal cells, and even some degree of stiffening was discovered. Nucleoplasts, as well as the nuclei isolated from cells using a detergent, were substantially softer than both the cytoplasts and normal cells.

conclusionsThe cell can maintain its mechanical properties without the nucleus. Together, the obtained data indicate the dominating role of the actomyosin cytoskeleton over the nucleus in the cell mechanics at small deformations inflicted by AFM.

Indexed as

ElasticityActin CytoskeletonAnimalsCell LineCell MembraneCell NucleusCytoskeletonFibroblastsFibrosarcomaHumansMechanotransduction, CellularMicroscopy, Atomic ForceMicroscopy, ConfocalMicroscopy, FluorescenceNanoparticlesRatsAFMCell mechanical propertiesCytoplastsEnucleated cellsNucleusViscoelasticity

Identifiers

PMID32943055
PMCPMC7500557
OpenAlexW3087062651

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.