ArticleActa biomaterialia2024
Unexpected softening of a fibrous matrix by contracting inclusions.
Article in Acta biomaterialia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Digital Volume Correlation Challenge 2.0: A Comprehensive Dataset for Digital Volume Correlation Benchmarking.Research square · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Cells respond to the stiffness of their surrounding environment, but quantifying the stiffness of a fibrous matrix at the scale of a cell is complicated, due to the effects of nonlinearity and complex force transmission pathways resulting from randomness in fiber density and connections. While it is known that forces produced by individual contractile cells can stiffen the matrix, it remains unclear how simultaneous contraction of multiple cells in a fibrous matrix alters the stiffness at the scale of a cell. Here, we used computational modeling and experiments to quantify the stiffness of a random fibrous matrix embedded with multiple contracting inclusions, which mimicked the contractile forces of a cell. The results showed that when the matrix was free to contract as a result of the forces produced by the inclusions, the matrix softened rather than stiffened, which was surprising given that the contracting inclusions applied tensile forces to the matrix. Using the computational model, we identified that the underlying cause of the softening was that the majority of the fibers were under a local state of axial compression, causing buckling. We verified that this buckling-induced matrix softening was sufficient for cells to sense and respond by altering their morphology and force generation. Our findings reveal that the localized forces induced by cells do not always stiffen the matrix; rather, softening can occur in instances wherein the matrix can contract in response to the cell-generated forces. This study opens up new possibilities to investigate whether cell-induced softening contributes to maintenance of homeostatic conditions or progression of disease. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: Mechanical interactions between cells and the surrounding matrix strongly influence cellular functions. Cell-induced forces can alter matrix properties, and much prior literature in this area focused on the influence of individual contracting cells. Cells in tissues are rarely solitary; rather, they are interspersed with neighboring cells throughout the matrix. As a result, the mechanics are complicated, leaving it unclear how the multiple contracting cells affect matrix stiffness. Here, we show that multiple contracting inclusions within a fibrous matrix can cause softening that in turn affects cell sensing and response. Our findings provide new directions to determine impacts of cell-induced softening on maintenance of tissue or progression of disease.
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.