Skip to main content

Research progress in quantifying the mechanical properties of single living cells using atomic force microscopy

Abstract

The advent of atomic force microscopy (AFM) provides a powerful tool for investigating the behaviors of single living cells under near physiological conditions. Besides acquiring the images of cellular ultra-microstructures with nanometer resolution, the most remarkable advances are achieved on the use of AFM indenting technique to quantify the mechanical properties of single living cells. By indenting single living cells with AFM tip, we can obtain the mechanical properties of cells and monitor their dynamic changes during the biological processes (e.g., after the stimulation of drugs). AFM indentation-based mechanical analysis of single cells provides a novel approach to characterize the behaviors of cells from the perspective of biomechanics, considerably complementing the traditional biological experimental methods. Now, AFM indentation technique has been widely used in the life sciences, yielding a large amount of novel information that is meaningful to our understanding of the underlying mechanisms that govern the cellular biological functions. Here, based on the authors’ own researches on AFM measurement of cellular mechanical properties, the principle and method of AFM indentation technique was presented, the recent progress of measuring the cellular mechanical properties using AFM was summarized, and the challenges of AFM single-cell nanomechanical analysis were discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  1. 1.

    Stewart MP, Toyoda Y, Hyman AA et al (2011) Force probing cell shape changes to molecular resolution. Trends Biochem Sci 36:444–450

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Chen CS (2008) Mechanotransduction: a field pulling together. J Cell Sci 121:3285–3292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Miller CJ, Davidson LA (2013) The interplay between cell signaling and mechanics in developmental processes. Nat Rev Genet 14:733–744

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Discher DE, Janmey P, Wang YL (2005) Tissue cells feel and respond to the stiffness of their substrate. Science 310:1139–1143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Engler AJ, Sen S, Sweeney HL et al (2006) Matrix elasticity directs stem cell lineage specification. Cell 126:677–689

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Li J, Han D, Zhao YP (2014) Kinetic behaviour of the cells touching substrate: the interfacial stiffness guides cell spreading. Sci Rep 4:3910

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Geiger B, Spatz JP, Bershadsky AD (2009) Environmental sensing through focal adhesions. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 10:21–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Lee GYH, Lim CT (2007) Biomechanics approaches to studying human diseases. Trends Biotechnol 25:111–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Cross SE, Jin YS, Rao JY et al (2007) Nanomechanical analysis of cells from cancer patients. Nat Nanotechnol 2:780–783

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Swaminathan V, Mythreye K, O Brien ET et al (2011) Mechanical stiffness grades metastatic potential in patient tumor cells and in cancer cell lines. Cancer Res 71:5075–5080

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Chowdhury F, Na S, Li D et al (2010) Material properties of the cell dictate stress-induced spreading and differentiation in embryonic stem cells. Nat Mater 9:82–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Bergert M, Chandradoss SD, Desai RA et al (2012) Cell mechanics control rapid transitions between blebs and lamellipodia during migration. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109:14434–14439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Plodinec M, Loparic M, Monnier CA et al (2012) The nanomechanical signature of breast cancer. Nat Nanotechnol 7:757–765

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Gossett DR, Tse HTK, Lee SA et al (2012) Hydrodynamic stretching of single cells for large population mechanical phenotyping. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109:7630–7635

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Carlo DD (2012) A mechanical biomarker of cell state in medicine. J Lab Autom 17:32–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Cha S, Shin T, Lee SS et al (2012) Cell stretching measurement utilizing viscoelastic particle focusing. Anal Chem 84:10471–10477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Mao X, Huang TJ (2012) Exploiting mechanical biomarkers in microfluidics. Lab Chip 12:4006–4009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Beech JP, Holm SH, Adolfsson K et al (2012) Sorting cells by size, shape and deformability. Lab Chip 12:1048–1051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Shojaei-Baghini E, Zheng Y, Sun Y (2013) Automated micropipette aspiration of single cells. Ann Biomed Eng 41:1208–1216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Zhou ZL, Hui TH, Tang B et al (2014) Accurate measurement of stiffness of leukemia cells and leukocytes using an optical trap by a rate-jump method. RSC Adv 4:8453–8460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Radmacher M (2002) Measuring the elastic properties of living cells by the atomic force microscope. Methods Cell Biol 68:67–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Lingwood D, Simons K (2010) Lipid rafts as a membrane-organizing principle. Science 327:46–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Spedden E, White JD, Naumova EN et al (2012) Elasticity maps of living neurons measured by combined fluorescence and atomic force microscopy. Biophys J 103:868–877

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Heu C, Berquand A, Elie-Caille C et al (2012) Glyphosate-induced stiffening of HaCaT keratinocytes, a peak force tapping study on living cells. J Struct Biol 178:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Alsteens D, Trabelsi H, Soumillion P et al (2013) Multiparametric atomic force microscopy imaging of single bacteriophages extruding from living bacteria. Nat Commun 4:2926

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Lam WA, Chaudhuri O, Crow A et al (2011) Mechanics and contraction dynamics of single platelets and implications for clot stiffening. Nat Mater 10:61–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Stewart MP, Helenius J, Toyoda Y et al (2011) Hydrostatic pressure and the actomyosin cortex drive mitotic cell rounding. Nature 469:226–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Taatjes DJ, Quinn AS, Rand JH et al (2013) Atomic force microscopy: high resolution dynamic imaging of cellular and molecular structure in health and disease. J Cell Physiol 228:1949–1955

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Li M, Liu LQ, Xi N et al (2013) Progress of AFM single-cell and single-molecule morphology imaging. Chin Sci Bull 58:3177–3182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Li M, Liu LQ, Xi N et al (2013) Mapping CD20 molecules on the lymphoma cell surface using atomic force microscopy. Chin Sci Bull 58:1516–1519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Kirmizis D, Logothetidis S (2010) Atomic force microscopy probing in the measurement of cell mechanics. Int J Nanomed 5:137–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Gavara N, Chadwick RS (2012) Determination of the elastic moduli of thin samples and adherent cells using conical atomic force microscope tips. Nat Nanotechnol 7:733–736

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Velegol SB, Logan BE (2002) Contributions of bacterial surface polymers, electrostatics, and cell elasticity to the shape of AFM force curves. Langmuir 18:5256–5262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Martens JC, Radmacher M (2008) Softening of the actin cytoskeleton by inhibition of myosin II. Pflugers Arch Eur J Physiol 456:95–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Medalsy ID, Muller DJ (2013) Nanomechanical properties of proteins and membranes depend on loading rate and electrostatic interactions. ACS Nano 7:2642–2650

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Carl P, Schillers H (2008) Elasticity measurement of living cells with an atomic force microscope: data acquisition and processing. Eur J Physiol 457:551–559

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Oberleithner H, Callies C, Kusche-Vihrog K et al (2009) Potassium softens vascular endothelium and increases nitric oxide release. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:2829–2834

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Mahaffy RE, Shih CK, MacKintosh FC et al (2000) Scanning probe-based frequency-dependent microrheology of polymer gels and biological cells. Phys Rev Lett 85:880–883

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Nikkhah M, Strobl JS, Schmelz EM et al (2011) Evaluation of the influence of growth medium composition on cell elasticity. J Biomech 44:762–766

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Li M, Liu LQ, Xi N et al (2012) Atomic force microscopy imaging and mechanical properties measurement of red blood cells and aggressive cancer cells. Sci China Life Sci 55:968–973

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Stewart MP, Hodel AW, Spielhofer A et al (2013) Wedged AFM-cantilevers for parallel plate cell mechanics. Methods 60:186–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Chaudhuri O, Parekh SH, Lam WA et al (2009) Combined atomic force microscopy and side-view optical imaging for mechanical studies of cells. Nat Methods 6:383–387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    Rotsch C, Radmacher M (2000) Drug-induced changes of cytoskeleton structure and mechanics in fibroblast: an atomic force microscopy study. Biophys J 78:520–535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Costa KD (2004) Single-cell elastography: probing for disease with the atomic force microscope. Dis Markers 19:139–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Rotsch C, Jacobson K, Radmacher M (1999) Dimensional and mechanical dynamics of active and stable edges in motile fibroblasts investigated by using atomic force microscopy. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96:921–926

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. 46.

    Stolz M, Raiteri R, Daniels AU et al (2004) Dynamic elastic modulus of porcine articular cartilage determined at two different levels of tissue organization by indentation-type atomic force microscopy. Biophys J 86:3269–3283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. 47.

    Kasas S, Longo G, Dietler G (2013) Mechanical properties of biological specimens explored by atomic force microscopy. J Phys D Appl Phys 46:133001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. 48.

    Tao NJ, Lindsay SM, Lees S (1992) Measuring the microelastic properties of biological material. Biophys J 63:1165–1169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. 49.

    Radmacher M, Monika F, Hansma PK (1995) Imaging soft samples with the atomic force microscope: gelatin in water and propanol. Biophys J 69:264–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. 50.

    Maivald P, Butt HJ, Gould SAC et al (1991) Using force modulation to image surface elasticities with the atomic force microscope. Nanotechnology 2:103–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. 51.

    Hoh JH, Schoenenberger CA (1994) Surface morphology and mechanical properties of MDCK monolayers by atomic force microscopy. J Cell Sci 107:1105–1114

    Google Scholar 

  52. 52.

    Radmacher M, Fritz M, Kacher CM et al (1996) Measuring the viscoelastic properties of human platelets with the atomic force microscope. Biophys J 79:556–567

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. 53.

    Cuerrier CM, Gagner A, Lebel R et al (2009) Effect of thrombin and bradykinin on endothelial cell mechanical properties monitored through membrane deformation. J Mol Recognit 22:389–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. 54.

    Pelling AE, Veraitch FS, Chu CPK et al (2009) Mechanical dynamics of single cells during early apoptosis. Cell Motil Cytoskelet 66:409–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. 55.

    Hu M, Wang J, Zhao H et al (2009) Nanostructure and nanomechanics analysis of lymphocyte using AFM: from resting, activated to apoptosis. J Biomech 42:1513–1519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. 56.

    Liu Y, Feng J, Shi L et al (2012) In situ mechanical analysis of cardiomyocytes at nano scales. Nanoscale 4:99–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. 57.

    Li M, Liu L, Xi N et al (2014) Nanoscale imaging and mechanical analysis of Fc receptor-mediated macrophage phagocytosis against cancer cells. Langmuir 30:1609–1621

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. 58.

    Berdyyeva TK, Woodworth CD, Sokolov I (2005) Human epithelial cells increase their rigidity with ageing in vitro: direct measurements. Phys Med Biol 50:81–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. 59.

    Leporatti S, Gerth A, Kohler G et al (2006) Elasticity and adhesion of resting and lipopolysaccharide-stimulated macrophages. FEBS Lett 580:450–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. 60.

    Lulevich V, Yang H, Isseroff RR et al (2010) Single cell mechanics of keratinocyte cells. Ultramicroscopy 110:1435–1442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. 61.

    Li M, Xiao X, Liu L et al (2013) Atomic force microscopy study of the antigen-antibody binding force on patient cancer cells based on ROR1 fluorescence recognition. J Mol Recognit 26:432–438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. 62.

    Lekka M, Gil D, Pogoda K et al (2012) Cancer cell detection in tissue sections using AFM. Arch Biochem Biophys 518:151–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. 63.

    Zhou Z, Zheng C, Li S et al (2013) AFM nanoindentation detection of the elastic modulus of tongue squamous carcinoma cells with different metastatic potentials. Nanomedicine 9:864–874

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. 64.

    Mao Y, Sun Q, Wang X et al (2009) In vivo nanomechanical imaging of blood-vessel tissues directly in living mammals using atomic force microscopy. Appl Phys Lett 95:013704

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. 65.

    Longo G, Alonso-Sarduy L, Rio LM et al (2013) Rapid detection of bacterial resistance to antibiotics using AFM cantilevers as nanomechanical sensors. Nat Nanotechnol 8:522–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. 66.

    McKendry RA, Kappeler N (2013) Sensors: good vibrations for bad bacteria. Nat Nanotechnol 8:483–484

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. 67.

    Butcher DT, Alliston T, Weaver VM (2009) A tense situation: forcing tumour progression. Nat Rev Cancer 9:108–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. 68.

    Janmey PA, McCulloch CA (2007) Cell mechanics: integrating cell responses to mechanical stimuli. Ann Rev Biomed Eng 9:1–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. 69.

    Fletcher DA, Mullins RD (2010) Cell mechanics and the cytoskeleton. Nature 463:485–492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. 70.

    Fritsch A, Hockel M, Kiessling T et al (2010) Are biomechanical changes necessary for tumour progression. Nat Phys 6:730–732

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. 71.

    Dufrene YF, Pelling AE (2013) Force nanoscopy of cell mechanics and cell adhesion. Nanoscale 5:4094–4104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. 72.

    Muller DJ, Dufrene YF (2011) Atomic force microscopy: a nanoscopic window on the cell surface. Trends Cell Biol 21:461–469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. 73.

    Wang Z, Liu L, Wang Y et al (2012) A fully automated system for measuring cellular mechanical properties. J Lab Autom 17:443–448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. 74.

    Lin DC, Dimitriadis EK, Horkay F (2007) Robust strategies for automated AFM force curve analysis: I. non-adhesive indentation of soft, inhomogeneous materials. J Biomech Eng 129:430–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. 75.

    Kasas S, Wang X, Hirling H et al (2005) Superficial and deep changes of cellular mechanical properties following cytoskeleton disassembly. Cell Motil Cytoskelet 62:124–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. 76.

    Rosenbluth MJ, Lam WA, Fletcher DA (2006) Force microscopy of nonadherent cells: a comparison of leukemia cell deformability. Biophys J 90:2994–3003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. 77.

    Roduit C, Sekatski S, Dietler G et al (2009) Stiffness tomography by atomic force microscopy. Biophys J 97:674–677

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. 78.

    Labernadie A, Thibault C, Vieu C et al (2010) Dynamics of podosome stiffness revealed by atomic force microscopy. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107:21016–21021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. 79.

    Chahine NO, Blanchette C, Thomas CB et al (2013) Effect of age and cytoskeletal elements on the indentation-dependent mechanical properties of chondrocytes. PLoS One 8:e61651

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. 80.

    Krause M, Riet J, Wolf K (2013) Probing the compressibility of tumor cell nuclei by combined atomic force-confocal microscopy. Phys Biol 10:065002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. 81.

    Yu JQ, Yuan JH, Zhang XJ et al (2013) Nanoscale imaging with an integrated system combining stimulated emission depletion microscope and atomic force microscope. Chin Sci Bull 58:4045–4050

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. 82.

    Suzuki Y, Sakai N, Yoshida A et al (2013) High-speed atomic force microscopy combined with inverted optical microscopy for studying cellular events. Sci Rep 3:2131

    Google Scholar 

  83. 83.

    Fukuda S, Uchihashi T, Iino R et al (2013) High-speed atomic force microscope combined with single-molecule fluorescence microscope. Rev Sci Instrum 84:073706

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. 84.

    Colom A, Casuso I, Rico F et al (2013) A hybrid high-speed atomic force-optical microscope for visualizing single membrane proteins on eukaryotic cells. Nat Commun 4:2155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. 85.

    Churnside AB, Sullan RMA, Nguyen DM et al (2012) Routine and timely sub-piconewton force stability and precision for biological applications of atomic force microscopy. Nano Lett 12:3557–3561

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. 86.

    Linkov P, Artemyev M, Efimov AE et al (2013) Comparative advantages and limitations of the basic metrology methods applied to the characterization of nanomaterials. Nanoscale 5:8781–8798

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. 87.

    Bhatia B, Karthik J, Gahill DG et al (2011) High-temperature piezoresponse force microscopy. Appl Phys Lett 99:173103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. 88.

    Stan G, Solares SD, Pittenger B et al (2014) Nanoscale mechanics by tomographic contact resonance atomic force microscopy. Nanoscale 6:962–969

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. 89.

    Dufrene YF, Martinez-Martin D, Medalsy I et al (2013) Multiparametric imaging of biological systems by force-distance curve-based AFM. Nat Methods 10:847–854

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (61175103, 61327014) and CAS FEA International Partnership Program for Creative Research Teams.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Lianqing Liu or Ning Xi.

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, M., Liu, L., Xi, N. et al. Research progress in quantifying the mechanical properties of single living cells using atomic force microscopy. Chin. Sci. Bull. 59, 4020–4029 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11434-014-0581-2

Download citation

Keywords

  • Atomic force microscopy
  • Cellular mechanical properties
  • Indentation
  • Force curve
  • Elastic modulus