0
Technical Brief

Differences in Morphology and Traction Generation of Cell Lines Representing Different Stages of Osteogenesis

[+] Author and Article Information
Michael J. Poellmann

Mem. ASME
Department of Mechanical Science and Engineering,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,
Urbana, IL 61801

Jonathan B. Estrada

School of Engineering,
Brown University,
Providence, RI 02912

Thomas Boudou

Laboratory of Materials and Physical Engineering,
Grenoble Institute of Technology,
Grenoble 38016, France

Zachary T. Berent

Department of Mechanical Science and Engineering,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,
Urbana, IL 61801

Christian Franck

Mem. ASME
School of Engineering,
Brown University,
Providence, RI 02912
e-mail: franck@brown.edu

Amy J. Wagoner Johnson

Mem. ASME
Department of Mechanical Science and Engineering,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,
1206 W. Green Street,
Urbana, IL 61801
e-mail: ajwj@illinois.edu

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received April 10, 2015; final manuscript received October 10, 2015; published online November 3, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Carlijn V. C Bouten.

J Biomech Eng 137(12), 124503 (Nov 03, 2015) (5 pages) Paper No: BIO-15-1158; doi: 10.1115/1.4031848 History: Received April 10, 2015; Revised October 10, 2015

Osteogenesis is the process by which mesenchymal stem cells differentiate to osteoblasts and form bone. The morphology and root mean squared (RMS) traction of four cell types representing different stages of osteogenesis were quantified. Undifferentiated D1, differentiated D1, MC3T3-E1, and MLO-A5 cell types were evaluated using both automated image analysis of cells stained for F-actin and by traction force microscopy (TFM). Undifferentiated mesenchymal stem cell lines were small, spindly, and exerted low traction, while differentiated osteoblasts were large, had multiple processes, and exerted higher traction. Size, shape, and traction all correlated with the differentiation stage. Thus, cell morphology evolved and RMS traction increased with differentiation. The results provide a foundation for further work with these cell lines to study the mechanobiology of bone formation.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Topics: Traction , Shapes , Microscopy
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Shape factor evolved with differentiation stage. Representative fluorescent images of (a) uD1, (b) dD1, (c) MC3T3-E1, and (d) MLO-A5 cells. Differentiation stage correlated with (e) area, (f) circularity, and (g) inverse aspect ratio (Table 1). All measures increased differentiation stage, with a monotonic and statistically significant correlation according to the Spearman rank analysis (Table 1). Statistically significant pairwise differences determined by ANOVA and Tukey means analysis (p < 0.05) are indicated by brackets.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

RMS traction increased with differentiation stage. Representative traction field contour maps of (a) uD1, (b) dD1, (c) MC3T3-E1, and (d) MLO-A5 cells shown with logarithmic scale. Color available in online version. (e) The RMS traction increased differentiation stage according to the Spearman rank analysis, with a monotonic and statistically significant correlation (Table1). Statistically significant pairwise differences (p < 0.05) are indicated by brackets.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In