Advertisement

Annals of Biomedical Engineering

, Volume 39, Issue 7, pp 1891–1903 | Cite as

Mechanical and Structural Contribution of Non-Fibrillar Matrix in Uniaxial Tension: A Collagen-Agarose Co-Gel Model

  • Spencer P. Lake
  • Victor H. BarocasEmail author
Article

Abstract

The mechanical role of non-fibrillar matrix and the nature of its interaction with the collagen network in soft tissues remain poorly understood, in part because of the lack of a simple experimental model system to quantify these interactions. This study’s objective was to examine mechanical and structural properties of collagen-agarose co-gels, utilized as a simplified model system, to understand better the relationships between the collagen network and non-fibrillar matrix. We hypothesized that the presence of agarose would have a pronounced effect on microstructural reorganization and mechanical behavior. Samples fabricated from gel solutions containing 1.0 mg/mL collagen and 0, 0.125, or 0.25% w/v agarose were evaluated via scanning electron microscopy, incremental tensile stress-relaxation tests, and polarized light imaging. While the incorporation of agarose did not dramatically alter collagen network morphology, agarose led to concentration-dependent changes in mechanical and structural properties. Specifically, resistance of co-gels to volume change corresponded with differences in fiber reorientation and elastic/viscoelastic mechanics. Results demonstrate strong relationships between tissue properties and offer insight into behavior of tissues of varying Poisson’s ratio and fiber kinematics. Results also suggest that non-fibrillar material may have significant effects on properties of artificial and native tissues even in tension, which is generally assumed to be collagen dominated.

Keywords

Non-fibrillar matrix Fiber-matrix interactions Collagen gel Agarose Soft tissue analog Mechanical and structural properties 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Victor Lai, Xiao Zhong, and Sadie Doggett for help with SEM acquisition, mechanical testing, and data analysis, respectively. We gratefully acknowledge the financial support of NIH Grants R01-EB005813 and F32-EB012352, and the NSF’s support of the University of Minnesota’s Characterization Facility.

Conflict of Interest

No benefits in any form have been or will be received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this manuscript.

References

  1. 1.
    Batorsky, A., et al. Encapsulation of adult human mesenchymal stem cells within collagen-agarose microenvironments. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 92(4):492–500, 2005.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Billiar, K. L., and M. S. Sacks. A method to quantify the fiber kinematics of planar tissues under biaxial stretch. J. Biomech. 30(7):753–756, 1997.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Buckwalter, J. A. Musculoskeletal soft tissues. In: Orthopaedic Surgery: The Essentials, edited by M. Baratz, A. D. Watson, and J. E. Imbriglia. New York, NY: Thieme, 1999.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chandran, P. L., and V. H. Barocas. Microstructural mechanics of collagen gels in confined compression: poroelasticity, viscoelasticity, and collapse. J. Biomech. Eng. 126(2):152–166, 2004.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chandran, P. L., and V. H. Barocas. Affine versus non-affine fibril kinematics in collagen networks: theoretical studies of network behavior. J. Biomech. Eng. 128(2):259–270, 2006.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cheng, V. W. T., and H. R. C. Screen. The micro-structural strain response of tendon. J. Mater. Sci. 42(21):8957–8965, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Elliott, D. M., and L. A. Setton. A linear material model for fiber-induced anisotropy of the anulus fibrosus. J. Biomech. Eng. 122(2):173–179, 2000.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gilbert, T. W., et al. Fiber kinematics of small intestinal submucosa under biaxial and uniaxial stretch. J. Biomech. Eng. 128(6):890–898, 2006.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Guerin, H. A., and D. M. Elliott. The role of fiber-matrix interactions in a nonlinear fiber-reinforced strain energy model of tendon. J. Biomech. Eng. 127(2):345–350, 2005.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Guerin, H. A., and D. M. Elliott. Degeneration affects the fiber reorientation of human annulus fibrosus under tensile load. J. Biomech. 39(8):1410–1418, 2006.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hewitt, J., et al. Regional material properties of the human hip joint capsule ligaments. J. Orthop. Res. 19(3):359–364, 2001.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jones, C. P. Living beyond our “means”: new methods for comparing distributions. Am. J. Epidemiol. 146(12):1056–1066, 1997.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Knapp, D., et al. Rheology of reconstituted type I collagen gel in confined compression. J. Rheol. 41:971, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Krishnan, L., et al. Design and application of a test system for viscoelastic characterization of collagen gels. Tissue Eng. 10(1–2):241–252, 2004.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lake, S. P. Anisotropic, Inhomogeneous and Nonlinear Structure-Function of Human Supraspinatus Tendon. Department of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 2009.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lake, S. P. et al. Evaluation of affine fiber kinematics in human supraspinatus tendon using quantitative projection plot analysis. Biomech. Model Mechanobiol. 2011 (in press).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lanir, Y. A structural theory for the homogeneous biaxial stress-strain relationships in flat collagenous tissues. J. Biomech. 12(6):423–436, 1979.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Laurencin, C. T., et al. Tissue engineering: orthopedic applications. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 1:19–46, 1999.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lund, A. W., et al. Osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells in defined protein beads. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. B 87(1):213–221, 2008.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lynch, H. A., et al. Effect of fiber orientation and strain rate on the nonlinear uniaxial tensile material properties of tendon. J. Biomech. Eng. 125(5):726–731, 2003.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Malvern, L. E. Introduction to the Mechanics of a Continuous Medium. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1969.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nomura, Y., Y. Ishii, and K. Takahashi. Control of collagen molecular assembly with anionic polysaccharides. Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 73(4):926–929, 2009.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Normand, V., et al. New insight into agarose gel mechanical properties. Biomacromolecules 1(4):730–738, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    O’Connell, G. D., H. L. Guerin, and D. M. Elliott. Theoretical and uniaxial experimental evaluation of human annulus fibrosus degeneration. J. Biomech. Eng. 131(11):111007, 2009.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Reese, S. P., S. A. Maas, and J. A. Weiss. Micromechanical models of helical superstructures in ligament and tendon fibers predict large poisson’s ratios. J. Biomech. 43(7):1394–1400, 2010.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Roeder, B. A., et al. Tensile mechanical properties of three-dimensional type I collagen extracellular matrices with varied microstructure. J. Biomech. Eng. 124(2):214–222, 2002.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Schwartz, M. H., P. H. Leo, and J. L. Lewis. A microstructural model for the elastic response of articular cartilage. J. Biomech. 27(7):865–873, 1994.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shirazi, R., and A. Shirazi-Adl. Deep vertical collagen fibrils play a significant role in mechanics of articular cartilage. J. Orthop. Res. 26(5):608–615, 2008.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Stylianopoulos, T., and V. H. Barocas. Multiscale, structure-based modeling for the elastic mechanical behavior of arterial walls. J. Biomech. Eng. 129(4):611–618, 2007.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Stylianopoulos, T., and V. H. Barocas. Volume-averaging theory for the study of the mechanics of collagen networks. Comput. Methods Biomech. Biomed. Eng. 196(31–32):2981–2990, 2007.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Thomopoulos, S., G. M. Fomovsky, and J. W. Holmes. The development of structural and mechanical anisotropy in fibroblast populated collagen gels. J. Biomech. Eng. 127(5):742–750, 2005.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Tower, T. T., M. R. Neidert, and R. T. Tranquillo. Fiber alignment imaging during mechanical testing of soft tissues. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 30(10):1221–1233, 2002.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ulrich, T. A., et al. Probing cellular mechanobiology in three-dimensional culture with collagen-agarose matrices. Biomaterials 31(7):1875–1884, 2010.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wagner, D. R., and J. C. Lotz. Theoretical model and experimental results for the nonlinear elastic behavior of human annulus fibrosus. J. Orthop. Res. 22(4):901–909, 2004.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wang, J. H. Mechanobiology of tendon. J. Biomech. 39(9):1563–1582, 2006.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Weiss, J. A., B. N. Maker, and S. Govindjee. Finite element implementation of incompressible, transversely isotropic hyperelasticity. Comput. Methods Biomech. Biomed. Eng. 135:107–128, 1996.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Wood, G. C., and M. K. Keech. The formation of fibrils from collagen solutions. 1. The effect of experimental conditions: kinetic and electron-microscope studies. Biochem. J. 75:588–598, 1960.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Yeh, G., and J. L. Esterhai. Orthopaedics. In: The Surgical Review: An Integrated Basic and Clinical Science Guide, edited by D. Kreisal, A. S. Krupnick, and L. R. Kaiser. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 2000.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Biomedical Engineering Society 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biomedical EngineeringUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations