Cell clusters softening triggers collective cell migration in vivo
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Embryogenesis, tissue repair and cancer metastasis rely on collective cell migration. In vitro studies propose that cells are stiffer while migrating in stiff substrates, but softer when plated in compliant surfaces which are typically considered as non-permissive for migration. Here we show that cells within clusters from embryonic tissue dynamically decrease their stiffness in response to the temporal stiffening of their native substrate to initiate collective cell migration. Molecular and mechanical perturbations of embryonic tissues reveal that this unexpected mechanical response involves a mechanosensitive pathway relying on Piezo1-mediated microtubule deacetylation. We further show that decreasing microtubule acetylation and consequently cluster stiffness is sufficient to trigger collective cell migration in soft non-permissive substrates. This suggests that reaching an optimal cluster-to-substrate stiffness ratio is essential to trigger the onset of this collective process. Overall, these in vivo findings challenge the current understanding of collective cell migration and its physiological and pathological roles.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Cellular Mechanics and Interactions · Erythrocyte Function and Pathophysiology · Microtubule and mitosis dynamics
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (57)
Show source-provided references
1. Vicente-Manzanares, M., Webb, D. J. & Horwitz, A. R. Cell migration at a glance. J. Cell Sci. 118, 4917–4919 (2005).10.1242/jcs.02662 ↗
2. Yamada, K. M. & Sixt, M. Mechanisms of 3D cell migration. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 20, 738–752 (2019).10.1038/s41580-019-0172-9 ↗
3. Charras, G. & Sahai, E. Physical influences of the extracellular environment on cell migration. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 15, 813–824 (2014).10.1038/nrm3897 ↗
4. Barriga, E. H., Franze, K., Charras, G. & Mayor, R. Tissue stiffening coordinates morphogenesis by triggering collective cell migration in vivo. Nature 554, 523–527 (2018).10.1038/nature25742 ↗
5. Chevalier, N. R. et al. How tissue mechanical properties affect enteric neural crest cell migration. Sci. Rep. 6, 20927 (2016).
6. Doss, B. L. et al. Cell response to substrate rigidity is regulated by active and passive cytoskeletal stress. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 12817–12825 (2020).10.1073/pnas.1917555117 ↗
7. Tee, S. Y., Fu, J., Chen, C. S. & Janmey, P. A. Cell shape and substrate rigidity both regulate cell stiffness. Biophys. J. 100, L25–L27 (2011).10.1016/j.bpj.2010.12.3744 ↗
8. Luo, Q., Kuang, D., Zhang, B. & Song, G. Cell stiffness determined by atomic force microscopy and its correlation with cell motility. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1860, 1953–1960 (2016).10.1016/j.bbagen.2016.06.010 ↗
9. Rheinlaender, J. et al. Cortical cell stiffness is independent of substrate mechanics. Nat. Mater. 19, 1019–1025 (2020).10.1038/s41563-020-0684-x ↗
10. Kerosuo, L. et al. Enhanced expression of MycN/CIP2A drives neural crest toward a neural stem cell-like fate: implications for priming of neuroblastoma. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, E7351–E7360 (2018).10.1073/pnas.1800039115 ↗
11. Barriga, E. H. & Theveneau, E. In vivo neural crest cell migration is controlled by ‘mixotaxis’. Front. Physiol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2020.586432 (2020).10.3389/fphys.2020.586432 ↗
12. Gouignard, N., Andrieu, C. & Theveneau, E. Neural crest delamination and migration: Looking forward to the next 150 years. Genesis 56, e23107 (2018).10.1002/dvg.23107 ↗
13. Basan, M., Elgeti, J., Hannezo, E., Rappel, W. J. & Levine, H. Alignment of cellular motility forces with tissue flow as a mechanism for efficient wound healing. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 2452–2459 (2013).10.1073/pnas.1219937110 ↗
14. Malmi-Kakkada, A. N., Li, X., Samanta, H. S., Sinha, S. & Thirumalai, D. Cell growth rate dictates the onset of glass to fluidlike transition and long time superdiffusion in an evolving cell colony. Phys. Rev. 8, 021025 (2018).10.1103/PhysRevX.8.021025 ↗
15. Sinha, S., Malmi-Kakkada, A. N., Li, X., Samanta, H. S. & Thirumalai, D. Spatially heterogeneous dynamics of cells in a growing tumor spheroid: comparison between theory and experiments. Soft Matter 16, 5294–5304 (2020).10.1039/C9SM02277E ↗
16. Gonzalez, M. C., Hidalgo, C. A. & Barabasi, A. L. Understanding individual human mobility patterns. Nature 453, 779–782 (2008).10.1038/nature06958 ↗
17. Parry, B. R. et al. The bacterial cytoplasm has glass-like properties and is fluidized by metabolic activity. Cell 156, 183–194 (2014).10.1016/j.cell.2013.11.028 ↗
18. Roy, J., Mazzaferri, J., Filep, J. G. & Costantino, S. A haptotaxis assay for neutrophils using optical patterning and a high-content approach. Sci. Rep. 7, 2869 (2017).
19. StamenoviĆ, D., Wang, N. & Ingber, D. E. in Principles of Cellular Engineering (ed. King, M. R.) 81–101 (Academic Press, 2006).10.1016/B978-012369392-1/50005-X ↗
20. Coleman, A. K., Joca, H. C., Shi, G., Lederer, W. J. & Ward, C. W. Tubulin acetylation increases cytoskeletal stiffness to regulate mechanotransduction in striated muscle. J. Gen. Physiol. https://doi.org/10.1085/jgp.202012743 (2021).10.1085/jgp.202012743 ↗
21. Matis, M. The mechanical role of microtubules in tissue remodeling. BioEssays: N. Rev. Mol., Cell. Dev. Biol. 42, e1900244 (2020).10.1002/bies.201900244 ↗
22. Seetharaman, S. et al. Microtubules tune mechanosensitive cell responses. Nat. Mater. 21, 366–377 (2022).10.1038/s41563-021-01108-x ↗
23. Hubbert, C. et al. HDAC6 is a microtubule-associated deacetylase. Nature 417, 455–458 (2002).10.1038/417455a ↗
24. Joo, E. E. & Yamada, K. M. MYPT1 regulates contractility and microtubule acetylation to modulate integrin adhesions and matrix assembly. Nat. Commun. 5, 3510 (2014).
25. Harris, A. R., Daeden, A. & Charras, G. T. Formation of adherens junctions leads to the emergence of a tissue-level tension in epithelial monolayers. J. Cell Sci. 127, 2507–2517 (2014).
26. Weiser, D. C., Row, R. H. & Kimelman, D. Rho-regulated myosin phosphatase establishes the level of protrusive activity required for cell movements during zebrafish gastrulation. Development 136, 2375–2384 (2009).10.1242/dev.034892 ↗
27. Gnanasambandam, R. et al. GsMTx4: mechanism of inhibiting mechanosensitive ion channels. Biophys. J. 112, 31–45 (2017).10.1016/j.bpj.2016.11.013 ↗
28. Coste, B. et al. Piezo1 and Piezo2 are essential components of distinct mechanically activated cation channels. Science 330, 55–60 (2010).10.1126/science.1193270 ↗
29. Moroni, M., Servin-Vences, M. R., Fleischer, R., Sanchez-Carranza, O. & Lewin, G. R. Voltage gating of mechanosensitive PIEZO channels. Nat. Commun. 9, 1096 (2018).10.1038/s41467-018-03502-7 ↗
30. Koser, D. E. et al. Mechanosensing is critical for axon growth in the developing brain. Nat. Neurosci. 19, 1592–1598 (2016).10.1038/nn.4394 ↗
31. Thompson, A. J. et al. Rapid changes in tissue mechanics regulate cell behaviour in the developing embryonic brain. eLife https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.39356 (2019).10.7554/eLife.39356 ↗
32. Stewart, T. A. & Davis, F. M. Formation and function of mammalian epithelia: roles for mechanosensitive PIEZO1 ion channels. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 7, 260 (2019).10.3389/fcell.2019.00260 ↗
33. Rianna, C. & Radmacher, M. Comparison of viscoelastic properties of cancer and normal thyroid cells on different stiffness substrates. Eur. Biophys. J. 46, 309–324 (2017).10.1007/s00249-016-1168-4 ↗
34. Solon, J., Levental, I., Sengupta, K., Georges, P. C. & Janmey, P. A. Fibroblast adaptation and stiffness matching to soft elastic substrates. Biophys. J. 93, 4453–4461 (2007).10.1529/biophysj.106.101386 ↗
35. Lin, H. H. et al. Mechanical phenotype of cancer cells: cell softening and loss of stiffness sensing. Oncotarget 6, 20946–20958 (2015).10.18632/oncotarget.4173 ↗
36. Mickey, B. & Howard, J. Rigidity of microtubules is increased by stabilizing agents. J. Cell Biol. 130, 909–917 (1995).10.1083/jcb.130.4.909 ↗
37. Heck, J. N. et al. Microtubules regulate GEF-H1 in response to extracellular matrix stiffness. Mol. Biol. Cell 23, 2583–2592 (2012).10.1091/mbc.e11-10-0876 ↗
38. Barriga, E. H., Maxwell, P. H., Reyes, A. E. & Mayor, R. The hypoxia factor Hif-1alpha controls neural crest chemotaxis and epithelial to mesenchymal transition. J. Cell Biol. 201, 759–776 (2013).10.1083/jcb.201212100 ↗
39. Arslan, F. N., Eckert, J., Schmidt, T. & Heisenberg, C. P. Holding it together: when cadherin meets cadherin. Biophys. J. 120, 4182–4192 (2021).10.1016/j.bpj.2021.03.025 ↗
40. Ganz, A. et al. Traction forces exerted through N-cadherin contacts. Biol. Cell 98, 721–730 (2006).10.1042/BC20060039 ↗
41. Sunyer, R. et al. Collective cell durotaxis emerges from long-range intercellular force transmission. Science 353, 1157–1161 (2016).10.1126/science.aaf7119 ↗
42. Theveneau, E. et al. Collective chemotaxis requires contact-dependent cell polarity. Dev. Cell 19, 39–53 (2010).10.1016/j.devcel.2010.06.012 ↗
43. Adebowale, K. et al. Enhanced substrate stress relaxation promotes filopodia-mediated cell migration. Nat. Mater. 20, 1290–1299 (2021).10.1038/s41563-021-00981-w ↗
44. Collinet, C. & Lecuit, T. Programmed and self-organized flow of information during morphogenesis. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 22, 245–265 (2021).10.1038/s41580-020-00318-6 ↗
45. Gilmour, D., Rembold, M. & Leptin, M. From morphogen to morphogenesis and back. Nature 541, 311–320 (2017).10.1038/nature21348 ↗
46. van Helvert, S., Storm, C. & Friedl, P. Mechanoreciprocity in cell migration. Nat. Cell Biol. 20, 8–20 (2018).10.1038/s41556-017-0012-0 ↗
47. Hubrecht-Laboratorium (Embryologisch Instituut), Nieuwkoop, P. D. & Faber, J. Normal Table of Xenopus laevis (Daudin). A Systematical and Chronological Survey of the Development from the Fertilized Egg Till the End of Metamorphosis 2nd edn (North-Holland Pub. Co., 1967).
48. Barriga, E. H., Shellard, A. & Mayor, R. In vivo and in vitro quantitative analysis of neural crest cell migration. Methods Mol. Biol. 1976, 135–152 (2019).10.1007/978-1-4939-9412-0_11 ↗
49. O’Donnell, M., Hong, C. S., Huang, X., Delnicki, R. J. & Saint-Jeannet, J. P. Functional analysis of Sox8 during neural crest development in Xenopus. Development 133, 3817–3826 (2006).10.1242/dev.02558 ↗
50. Nandadasa, S., Tao, Q., Menon, N. R., Heasman, J. & Wylie, C. N- and E-cadherins in Xenopus are specifically required in the neural and non-neural ectoderm, respectively, for F-actin assembly and morphogenetic movements. Development 136, 1327–1338 (2009).10.1242/dev.031203 ↗
51. Trepat, X. et al. Physical forces during collective cell migration. Nat. Phys. 5, 426–430 (2009).10.1038/nphys1269 ↗
52. Huang, Y., Gompper, G. & Sabass, B. A Bayesian traction force microscopy method with automated denoising in a user-friendly software package. Comput. Phys. Commun. 256, 107313 (2020).10.1016/j.cpc.2020.107313 ↗
53. Alfandari, D., Cousin, H., Gaultier, A., Hoffstrom, B. G. & DeSimone, D. W. Integrin alpha5beta1 supports the migration of Xenopus cranial neural crest on fibronectin. Dev. Biol. 260, 449–464 (2003).10.1016/S0012-1606(03)00277-X ↗
54. Brooks, E. R. & Wallingford, J. B. In vivo investigation of cilia structure and function using Xenopus. Methods Cell. Biol. 127, 131–159 (2015).10.1016/bs.mcb.2015.01.018 ↗
55. Hutter, J. L. & Bechhoefer, J. Calibration of atomic‐force microscope tips. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 64, 1868–1873 (1993).10.1063/1.1143970 ↗
56. Moreira, S., Espina, J. A., Saraiva, J. E. & Barriga, E. H. A toolbox to study tissue mechanics in vivo and ex vivo. Methods Mol. Biol. 2438, 495–515 (2022).10.1007/978-1-0716-2035-9_29 ↗
57. Cao, L. et al. SPIN90 associates with mDia1 and the Arp2/3 complex to regulate cortical actin organization. Nat. Cell Biol. 22, 803–814 (2020).10.1038/s41556-020-0531-y ↗