Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Biophysical Journal logoLink to Biophysical Journal
. 1993 Jul;65(1):243–252. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(93)81077-4

Heterogeneity and probabilistic binding contributions to receptor-mediated cell detachment kinetics.

A Saterbak 1, S C Kuo 1, D A Lauffenburger 1
PMCID: PMC1225720  PMID: 8396454

Abstract

Biospecific cell adhesion is mediated by receptor-ligand bonds. Early theoretical work presented a deterministic analysis of receptor-mediated cell attachment and detachment for a homogeneous cell population. However, initial comparison of a deterministic framework to experimental detachment profiles of model "cells" (antibody-coated latex beads) did not show qualitative or quantitative agreement (Cozens-Roberts, C., D.A. Lauffenburger, and J.A. Quinn. 1990. Biophys. J. 58:857-872). Hence, we determine the contributions of population heterogeneity and probabilistic binding to the detachment behavior of this experimental system which was designed to minimize experimental and theoretical complications. This work also corrects an error in the numerical solution of the probabilistic model of receptor-mediated cell attachment and detachment developed previously (Cozens-Roberts, C., D.A. Lauffenburger, and J.A. Quinn. 1990. Biophys J. 58:841-856). Measurement of the population distribution of the number of receptors per bead has enabled us to explicitly consider the effect of receptor number heterogeneity within the cell-surface contact area. A deterministic framework that incorporates receptor number heterogeneity qualitatively and quantitatively accounts in large part for the model cell detachment data. Using measured and estimated parameter values for the model cell system, we estimate that about 90% of the observed kinetic detachment behavior originates from heterogeneity effects, while about 10% is due to probabilistic binding effects. In general, these relative contributions may differ for other systems.

Full text

PDF
243

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Albelda S. M., Daise M., Levine E. M., Buck C. A. Identification and characterization of cell-substratum adhesion receptors on cultured human endothelial cells. J Clin Invest. 1989 Jun;83(6):1992–2002. doi: 10.1172/JCI114109. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bell G. I. Estimate of the sticking probability for cells in uniform shear flow with adhesion caused by specific bonds. Cell Biophys. 1981 Sep;3(3):289–304. doi: 10.1007/BF02782629. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bell G. I. Models for the specific adhesion of cells to cells. Science. 1978 May 12;200(4342):618–627. doi: 10.1126/science.347575. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Berenson R. J., Bensinger W. I., Kalamasz D. Positive selection of viable cell populations using avidin-biotin immunoadsorption. J Immunol Methods. 1986 Jul 11;91(1):11–19. doi: 10.1016/0022-1759(86)90096-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Bongrand P., Golstein P. Reproducible dissociation of cellular aggregates with a wide range of calibrated shear forces: application to cytolytic lymphocyte target cell conjugates. J Immunol Methods. 1983 Mar 11;58(1-2):209–224. doi: 10.1016/0022-1759(83)90276-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. CURTIS A. S. THE MECHANISM OF ADHESION OF CELLS TO GLASS. A STUDY BY INTERFERENCE REFLECTION MICROSCOPY. J Cell Biol. 1964 Feb;20:199–215. doi: 10.1083/jcb.20.2.199. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Cozens-Roberts C., Lauffenburger D. A., Quinn J. A. Receptor-mediated cell attachment and detachment kinetics. I. Probabilistic model and analysis. Biophys J. 1990 Oct;58(4):841–856. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(90)82430-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Cozens-Roberts C., Quinn J. A., Lauffenberger D. A. Receptor-mediated adhesion phenomena. Model studies with the Radical-Flow Detachment Assay. Biophys J. 1990 Jul;58(1):107–125. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(90)82357-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Cozens-Roberts C., Quinn J. A., Lauffenburger D. A. Receptor-mediated cell attachment and detachment kinetics. II. Experimental model studies with the radial-flow detachment assay. Biophys J. 1990 Oct;58(4):857–872. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(90)82431-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Dembo M., Torney D. C., Saxman K., Hammer D. The reaction-limited kinetics of membrane-to-surface adhesion and detachment. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1988 Jun 22;234(1274):55–83. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1988.0038. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Gingell D., Todd I. Interference reflection microscopy. A quantitative theory for image interpretation and its application to cell-substratum separation measurement. Biophys J. 1979 Jun;26(3):507–526. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(79)85268-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Hammer D. A., Apte S. M. Simulation of cell rolling and adhesion on surfaces in shear flow: general results and analysis of selectin-mediated neutrophil adhesion. Biophys J. 1992 Jul;63(1):35–57. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(92)81577-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Hammer D. A., Lauffenburger D. A. A dynamical model for receptor-mediated cell adhesion to surfaces. Biophys J. 1987 Sep;52(3):475–487. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(87)83236-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Hubbard B. B., Glacken M. W., Rodgers J. R., Rich R. R. The role of physical forces on cytotoxic T cell-target cell conjugate stability. J Immunol. 1990 Jun 1;144(11):4129–4138. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Martin P. J., Giblett E. R., Hansen J. A. Phenotyping human leukemic T-cell lines: enzyme markers, surface antigens, and cytogenetics. Immunogenetics. 1982;15(4):385–398. doi: 10.1007/BF00364262. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. McClay D. R., Wessel G. M., Marchase R. B. Intercellular recognition: quantitation of initial binding events. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1981 Aug;78(8):4975–4979. doi: 10.1073/pnas.78.8.4975. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Perelson A. S., Goldstein B., Rocklin S. Optimal strategies in immunology III. The IgM-IgG switch. J Math Biol. 1980 Nov;10(3):209–256. doi: 10.1007/BF00276984. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Pratt B. M., Form D., Madri J. A. Endothelial cell-extracellular matrix interactions. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1985;460:274–288. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1985.tb51175.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Seeger R. C., Vo D. D., Ugelstad J., Reynolds C. P. Removal of neuroblastoma cells from bone marrow with monoclonal antibodies and magnetic immunobeads. Prog Clin Biol Res. 1986;211:285–293. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Van N. T., Raber M., Barrows G. H., Barlogie B. Estrogen receptor analysis by flow cytometry. Science. 1984 May 25;224(4651):876–879. doi: 10.1126/science.6719116. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Biophysical Journal are provided here courtesy of The Biophysical Society

RESOURCES