Dynamic Force Spectroscopy to Probe Adhesion Strength of Living Cells

Physical Review Letters

Volumn 89, Issue 2, 2002, Pages

  Prechtel, K ^a   Bausch, A R ^a   Marchi Artzner, V ^b   Kantlehner, M ^a   Kessler, H ^a   Merkel, R ^c  

^a TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^b Technische Universität München ^*  (France)

^c FORSCHUNGSZENTRUM JÜLICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL MEMBRANES; CELLS; CHEMICAL BONDS; FORCE MEASUREMENT; LOADS (FORCES); MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; PROTEINS; SPECTROSCOPIC ANALYSIS; STRENGTH OF MATERIALS; SURFACE TENSION;

DYNAMIC FORCE SPECTROSCOPY;

ADHESION;

ARGINYL-GLYCYL-ASPARTIC ACID; ARTIFICIAL MEMBRANE; COLLAGEN; LIPOPROTEIN; OLIGOPEPTIDE; VITRONECTIN; VITRONECTIN RECEPTOR;

ARTIFICIAL MEMBRANE; BINDING SITE; CELL ADHESION; CELL CULTURE; CHEMISTRY; CYTOLOGY; HUMAN; KINETICS; METABOLISM; MOLECULAR MIMICRY; PHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; SPECTROSCOPY; TENSILE STRENGTH; VASCULAR ENDOTHELIUM;

BINDING SITES; CELL ADHESION; CELLS, CULTURED; COLLAGEN; ENDOTHELIUM, VASCULAR; HUMANS; KINETICS; LIPOPROTEINS; MEMBRANES, ARTIFICIAL; MOLECULAR MIMICRY; OLIGOPEPTIDES; RECEPTORS, VITRONECTIN; SPECTRUM ANALYSIS; TENSILE STRENGTH; VITRONECTIN;

EID: 4244178117     PISSN: 00319007     EISSN: 10797114     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.89.028101     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. B. Alberts, D. Bray, J. Lewis, M. Raff, K. Roberts, and J. D. Watson, Molecular Biology of the Cell (Garland Publishing, New York,1994).
2. R. Alon, D. A. Hammer, and T. A. Springer, Nature (London) 374, 539 (1995);
3. Nature (London) K. D. Puri, S. Chen, and T. A. Springer, ibid. 392, 930 (1998);
4. Nature (London) R. Merkel, P. Nassoy, A. Leung, K. Ritchie, and E. Evans, ibid. 397, 50 (1999);
5. D. A. Simson, M. Strigl, M. Hohenadl, and R. Merkel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 652 (1999);
6. for a recent review, see R. Merkel, Phys. Rep. 346, 343 (2001).
7. G. I. Bell, M. Dembo, and P. Bongrand, Biophys. J. 45, 1051 (1984);
8. M. Dembo, D. C. Torney, K. Saxman, and D. Hammer, Proc. R. Soc. London B 234, 55 (1988);
9. A. Tozeren, K.-L. Sung, and S. Chien, Biophys. J. 55, 479 (1989);
10. C. Zhu, J. Biomech. 33, 23 (2000).
11. A. R. Bausch, F. Ziemann, A. A. Boulbitch, K. Jacobson, and E. Sackmann, Biophys. J. 75, 2038 (1998).
12. V. Marchi-Artzner, B. Lorz, U. Hellerer, M. Kantlehner, H. Kessler, and E. Sackmann, Chem. Eur. J. 7, 1095 (2001).
13. The peptide contained the RGD (arginine-glycine-aspartic acid) motif; cf. M. D. Pierschbacher and E. Ruoslahti, Nature (London) 309, 30 (1984);
14. J. W. Tamkun, D. W. DeSimone, D. Fonda, R. S. Patel, C. Buck, A. F. Horwitz, and R. O. Hynes, Cell 46, 271 (1986).
15. We used the cyclic pentapeptide cyclo[Arg-Gly-Asp-D-Phe-Lys]. This peptide exhibits a defined molecular geometry, which greatly enhances the affinity, as shown by R. Haubner, R. Gratias, B. Diefenbach, S. L. Goodman, A. Jonczyk, and H. Kessler, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 118, 7461 (1996);
16. M. Pfaff, K. Tangemann, B. Müller, M. Gurrath, G. Müller, H. Kessler, R. Timpl, and J. Engel, J. Biol. Chem. 269, 20233 (1994). The affinity of cyclic RGD peptides for different integrins was tested by measuring the peptide concentration necessary to reduce the amount of the respective integrins bound to vitronectin, their natural ligand, to (Formula presented). For the cyclic peptide used here this concentration was (Formula presented) for the integrin (Formula presented) and (Formula presented) for (Formula presented).
17. E. F. Plow, J. C. Loftus, E. G. Levin, D. S. Fair, D. Dixon, J. Forsyth, and M. H. Ginsberg, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 83, 6002 (1986);
18. J. Lawler and R. O. Hynes, Blood 74, 2022 (1989).
19. R. Lipowsky, Nature (London) 349, 475 (1991);
20. M. Bloom, E. Evans, and O. G. Mouritsen, Q. Rev. Biophys. 24, 293 (1991).
21. The vesicles were composed of di-elaidoyl-phosphatidyl-choline, cholesterol, di-oleoyl-phosphatidyl-ethanolamine-poly (Formula presented) (a PEG lipid), and the lipopeptide in a ratio of 50:50:1:4. Using a 1:1 mixture of cholesterol and phospholipid as matrix ensures membrane fluidity and mechanical toughness. The polymer moiety of the PEG lipid forms a dense layer covering the membrane that efficiently suppresses nonspecific interactions between cell and vesicle. The concentration of the PEG lipid was selected because at much lower density its passivation potency is impaired and at much higher concentration it forms micellar phases. Identical results were obtained at a 100 times lower lipopeptide concentration; therefore we did not further vary its concentration.
22. Cell viability was frequently checked after the experiments by the trypan blue test. In addition, no abnormal cell shapes (e.g., blebbing or rounding up) were observed. To ensure normal cell physiology the experiments were limited to durations of less than one hour.
23. J. M. Mitchison and M. M. Swann, J. Exp. Biol. 31, 443 (1954);
24. E. A. Evans, Methods Enzymol. 173, 3 (1989).
25. E. A. Evans, Biophys. J. 31, 425 (1980);
26. Biophys. J. D. A. Simson, F. Ziemann, M. Strigl, and R. Merkel, ibid. 74, 2080 (1998).
27. The specificity of this interaction was proven by three different tests: (i) experiments on cells that do not possess the integrin (Formula presented) (fibroblasts), (ii) experiments with vesicles that did not contain the lipopeptide, and (iii) experiments in a buffer containing (Formula presented) of the cyclic RGD peptide which saturated all binding sites. No adhesion was observed in any of these tests.
28. E. Evans, in Handbook of Biological Physics, R. Lipowsky and E. Sackmann (Elsevier Science, Amsterdam,1995), Vol. 1.
29. U. Seifert and R. Lipowsky, Phys. Rev. A 42, 4768 (1990).
30. The total experimental error was calculated from the uncertainties of the individual input parameters for the calculation of the acting force, cf.
31. From the density of receptors (Formula presented) and the width of the bending zone ( (Formula presented); cf. Fig. 2) we estimate that the line density of loaded bonds is (Formula presented). In our experiments the total number of loaded bonds ranged from 40 to 400.
32. G. I. Bell, Science 200, 618 (1978);
33. E. Evans and K. Ritchie, Biophys. J. 72, 1541 (1997).
34. U. Seifert, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 2750 (2000);
35. U. Seifert Europhys. Lett. 58, 792 (2002).
36. In Seifert’s model the bonds withstand a finite force at vanishing loading rates. This cannot be seen in our data, most likely because the corresponding ultralow loading rates could not be reached.
37. B. P. Toole, in Cell Biology of the Extracellular Matrix, E. D. Haye (Plenum, New York,1991).