Back

From Sensor Design to Force Maps: A Systematic Evaluation of FRET-based Vinculin Tension Sensors

Aytekin, S.; Vorsselmans, S.; Vankevelaer, G.; Poedts, B.; Hendrix, J.; Rocha, S.

2026-03-25 biophysics
10.64898/2026.03.23.713753 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Mechanical forces transmitted through focal adhesions regulate cell behavior and disease progression, yet remain difficult to quantify at the molecular level. Genetically encoded FRET-based tension probes enable measurements of piconewton-scale forces across specific proteins in living cells, but their quantitative interpretation is highly sensitive to probe design and measurement modality. Here, we systematically compared vinculin tension sensors under identical experimental conditions, evaluating unloaded reference constructs, fluorophore pairs, mechanical sensor modules, and circularly permuted variants. Unloaded controls established a common no-force baseline and validated force-dependent readout. Among the fluorophore pairs tested, the green-red combination Clover-mScarlet-I yielded a higher unloaded FRET efficiency and hence a broader measurable dynamic range. Comparison of six mechanical sensor modules identified the binary-response sensors FL and CC-S2 as the most responsive, showing the largest force-dependent FRET changes and broadest FRET distributions. At the sub-focal adhesion level, CC-S2 reported the steepest proximal-to-distal tension gradient, indicating that vinculin tension increases sharply along peripheral adhesions and exceeds 10 piconewton. Circular permutation experiments revealed that fluorophore orientation has a strong, module-dependent influence on the measured FRET readout. Together, these results establish a comparative framework for interpreting FLIM-based vinculin tension measurements and provide practical design principles for selecting and engineering molecular tension probes.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Biophysical Journal
545 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
10.0%
2
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 8%
9.1%
3
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 21%
8.9%
4
ACS Sensors
45 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.3%
5
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 18%
4.8%
6
Nano Letters
63 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
3.9%
7
Nucleic Acids Research
1128 papers in training set
Top 5%
3.9%
8
Biophysical Reports
36 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.8%
50% of probability mass above
9
ACS Synthetic Biology
256 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
3.6%
10
Cell Reports Methods
141 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.6%
11
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 49%
2.1%
12
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 31%
1.8%
13
Advanced Science
249 papers in training set
Top 10%
1.8%
14
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 15%
1.7%
15
ACS Nano
99 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
16
Molecular Biology of the Cell
272 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
17
Nature Methods
336 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.5%
18
Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology
218 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.5%
19
Analytical Chemistry
205 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.2%
20
Physical Biology
43 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.2%
21
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 16%
1.1%
22
Science Advances
1098 papers in training set
Top 25%
0.9%
23
Small
70 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.9%
24
ACS Photonics
13 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
25
Methods
29 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.8%
26
The Journal of Physical Chemistry B
158 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
27
RSC Chemical Biology
32 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%
28
Structure
175 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
29
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 27%
0.6%
30
Biosensors and Bioelectronics
52 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%