Back

Independent apical and basal mechanical systems determine cell and tissue shape in the Drosophila wing disc

Badugu, A.; Kaech, A.

2020-04-12 systems biology
10.1101/2020.04.10.036152 bioRxiv
Show abstract

How cell shape and mechanics are organized in three dimensions during tissue morphogenesis is poorly understood. In the Drosophila wing imaginal disc, we examined the mechanical processes that determine the shape of epithelial cells. Since it has been known that basement membrane influences the mechanics intracellularly, we reexamined the material properties of the basement membrane with fluorescence and transmission electron microscopy in its native environment. Further, we investigated the effect on cell shape and tissue mechanics when disruptions were instigated at three different time scales: (1) short (seconds with laser cutting), (2) medium (minutes with drug treatments), and (3) long (days with RNAi interference). We found regions in which the basement membrane is much thicker and heterogeneous than previously reported. Disrupting the actin cytoskeleton through drug treatment affects cell shape only at the apical surface, while the shapes in the medial and basal surfaces were not altered. In contrast, when integrin function was inhibited via RNAi or basement membrane integrity was disrupted by drug treatment, the medial and basal cell shapes were affected. We propose that basement membrane thickness patterns determine the height and basal surface area of cells and the curvature of folds in the wing disc. Based on these findings and previous studies, we propose a model of how cell shapes and tissue properties were determined by highly local, modular apical and basal mechanics. Graphical abstract O_FIG O_LINKSMALLFIG WIDTH=187 HEIGHT=200 SRC="FIGDIR/small/036152v2_ufig1.gif" ALT="Figure 1"> View larger version (38K): org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@177c8f0org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@1292624org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@871577org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@925bcd_HPS_FORMAT_FIGEXP M_FIG C_FIG

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.