27.12.2012 Views

ARUP; ISBN: 978-0-9562121-5-3 - CMBBE 2012 - Cardiff University

ARUP; ISBN: 978-0-9562121-5-3 - CMBBE 2012 - Cardiff University

ARUP; ISBN: 978-0-9562121-5-3 - CMBBE 2012 - Cardiff University

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

600 nm 2 /molecule. Furthermore, the cell size was varied in another set of simulations<br />

where bcell = 25, 35, and 55 µm, and fcell = 1. Both the cases where the adhesion<br />

coefficient was insensitive to bcell or increased with bcell were considered.<br />

Simulations were performed using the Solid Mechanics Module in COMSOL<br />

Multiphysics 4.2. Linear elastic material properties were assumed for the cellular<br />

domain. Time-dependent analyses were run with 1,000 time points from t = 0 to 600 s,<br />

which is in the range of one cell contraction cycle [13]. Results were then compared at<br />

the final time point.<br />

4. RESULTS<br />

Shown in Fig. 2(a) is a plot of the cell migration speed as a function of the ECM<br />

degradation coefficient for different values of fcell. For this case, the adhesion coefficient<br />

was independent of bcell and fixed at 600 nm 2 /molecule. As discussed in [9], the cell<br />

speed exhibits a biphasic relationship with respect to α since high ECM densities can<br />

impede movement whereas low densities do not provide enough mechanical support for<br />

the cell to exert tractions on. Note that as fcell was increased, the maximum cell speed<br />

increased in magnitude and occurred at a lower degradation coefficient as well. Since the<br />

traction was kept normal to boundary when the cell shape was altered, there was less<br />

traction in the direction of cell movement for the cells with the higher aspect ratios. As a<br />

result, these cells required higher ECM densities (lower degradation coefficients) to<br />

compensate. For the case where fcell = 2 in the simulations, the matrix density never<br />

approached a high enough value to impede cell movement. Thus, the speed did not drop<br />

to zero as the degradation coefficient was lowered.<br />

Figure 2. Plot of the average migration speed as a function of the ECM degradation coefficient for an<br />

aspect ratio of 2, 1.5, 1, 0.75, and 0.5 where the adhesion coefficient was (a) independent of bcell or (b)<br />

increased with bcell. (c) Plot of the dependency of the maximum traction on the degradation coefficient for<br />

the same case as part (b).

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!