Rupture strength of living cell monolayers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To fulfil their function, epithelial tissues need to sustain mechanical stresses and avoid rupture. Although rupture is usually undesired, it is central to some developmental processes, for example, blastocoel formation. Nonetheless, little is known about tissue rupture because it is a multiscale phenomenon that necessitates comprehension of the interplay between mechanical forces and biological processes at the molecular and cellular scales. Here we characterize rupture in epithelial monolayers using mechanical measurements, live imaging and computational modelling. We show that despite consisting of only a single layer of cells, monolayers can withstand surprisingly large deformations, often accommodating several-fold increases in their length before rupture. At large deformation, epithelia increase their stiffness multiple fold in a process controlled by a supracellular network of keratin filaments. Perturbing the keratin network organization fragilized the monolayers and prevented strain-stiffening. Although the kinetics of adhesive bond rupture ultimately control tissue strength, tissue rheology and the history of deformation set the strain and stress at the onset of fracture.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".