| Literature DB >> 27135321 |
Hannes Vogler1, Dimitrios Felekis2, Bradley J Nelson3, Ueli Grossniklaus4.
Abstract
The size, shape and stability of a plant depend on the flexibility and integrity of its cell walls, which, at the same time, need to allow cell expansion for growth, while maintaining mechanical stability. Biomechanical studies largely vanished from the focus of plant science with the rapid progress of genetics and molecular biology since the mid-twentieth century. However, the development of more sensitive measurement tools renewed the interest in plant biomechanics in recent years, not only to understand the fundamental concepts of growth and morphogenesis, but also with regard to economically important areas in agriculture, forestry and the paper industry. Recent advances have clearly demonstrated that mechanical forces play a crucial role in cell and organ morphogenesis, which ultimately define plant morphology. In this article, we will briefly review the available methods to determine the mechanical properties of cell walls, such as atomic force microscopy (AFM) and microindentation assays, and discuss their advantages and disadvantages. But we will focus on a novel methodological approach, called cellular force microscopy (CFM), and its automated successor, real-time CFM (RT-CFM).Entities:
Keywords: Young’s modulus; cell wall; cellular force microscope; cytomechanics; pollen tube; turgor pressure
Year: 2015 PMID: 27135321 PMCID: PMC4844320 DOI: 10.3390/plants4020167
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Advantages and disadvantages of mechanical characterization methods
| Force | Position | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Method | Resolution | Range | Resolution | Range | Specimen aspect ratio | High throughput | Non- destructive | |
| Magnetic or | ||||||||
| Optical tweezers | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✗ | |
| Extensometer | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✗ | |
| Microfluidic chip | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✗ | |
| AFM | ✓ | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | |
| CFM | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ | ✓ | |
| RT-CFM | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
Figure 1The cellular force microscope (CFM). (A) Schematic representation of the CFM. f and z are the measured values and fd, zd are the desired values of force and position, respectively. (B) The CFM setup on an inverted microscope. The lower panels show an image of the MEMS-based force sensor on the left and a schematic on the right side. Scale bar = 1 mm. Images in (B) taken from [68].
Figure 2The real-time cellular force microscope (RT-CFM). (A) Schematic representation of the RT-CFM. f and z are the measured values, and fd, zd are the desired values of force and position, respectively. e is the error between the desired and the measured values of force and position, and u is the control signal that is fed into the RT-CFM positioner. x and y are the coordinates of the measurement location to which the system has to be positioned. The task planner switches the system between measurement, positioning, calibration and post-processing tasks. The proportional-integral-derivative (PID) is the control scheme used to control to the positioner. (B) Custom inverted RT-CFM setup. Block diagram in (A) adapted from [78].