IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0017807.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An AFM-Based Stiffness Clamp for Dynamic Control of Rigidity

Author

Listed:
  • Kevin D Webster
  • Ailey Crow
  • Daniel A Fletcher

Abstract

Atomic force microscopy (AFM) has become a powerful tool for measuring material properties in biology and imposing mechanical boundary conditions on samples from single molecules to cells and tissues. Constant force or constant height can be maintained in an AFM experiment through feedback control of cantilever deflection, known respectively as a ‘force clamp’ or ‘position clamp’. However, stiffness, the third variable in the Hookean relation F = kx that describes AFM cantilever deflection, has not been dynamically controllable in the same way. Here we present and demonstrate a ‘stiffness clamp’ that can vary the apparent stiffness of an AFM cantilever. This method, employable on any AFM system by modifying feedback control of the cantilever, allows rapid and reversible tuning of the stiffness exposed to the sample in a way that can decouple the role of stiffness from force and deformation. We demonstrated the AFM stiffness clamp on two different samples: a contracting fibroblast cell and an expanding polyacrylamide hydrogel. We found that the fibroblast, a cell type that secretes and organizes the extracellular matrix, exhibited a rapid, sub-second change in traction rate (dF/dt) and contraction velocity (dx/dt) in response to step changes in stiffness between 1–100 nN/µm. This response was independent of the absolute contractile force and cell height, demonstrating that cells can react directly to changes in stiffness alone. In contrast, the hydrogel used in our experiment maintained a constant expansion velocity (dx/dt) over this range of stiffness, while the traction rate (dF/dt) changed with stiffness, showing that passive materials can also behave differently in different stiffness environments. The AFM stiffness clamp presented here, which is applicable to mechanical measurements on both biological and non-biological samples, may be used to investigate cellular mechanotransduction under a wide range of controlled mechanical boundary conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Kevin D Webster & Ailey Crow & Daniel A Fletcher, 2011. "An AFM-Based Stiffness Clamp for Dynamic Control of Rigidity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(3), pages 1-7, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0017807
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0017807
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0017807
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0017807&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0017807?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Akiko Mammoto & Kip M. Connor & Tadanori Mammoto & Chong Wing Yung & Dongeun Huh & Christopher M. Aderman & Gustavo Mostoslavsky & Lois E. H. Smith & Donald E. Ingber, 2009. "A mechanosensitive transcriptional mechanism that controls angiogenesis," Nature, Nature, vol. 457(7233), pages 1103-1108, February.
    2. Ovijit Chaudhuri & Sapun H. Parekh & Daniel A. Fletcher, 2007. "Reversible stress softening of actin networks," Nature, Nature, vol. 445(7125), pages 295-298, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. René F M van Oers & Elisabeth G Rens & Danielle J LaValley & Cynthia A Reinhart-King & Roeland M H Merks, 2014. "Mechanical Cell-Matrix Feedback Explains Pairwise and Collective Endothelial Cell Behavior In Vitro," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-14, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0017807. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.