Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 245

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Tissue spreading on implantable substrates is a competitive outcome of cell–cell vs. cell–substratum adhesivity

Open access
Ryan, Peter L., Foty, Ramsey A., Kohn, Joachim, Steinberg, Malcolm S.·2001·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

While the interactions of cells with polymeric substrata are widely studied, the influence of cell–cell cohesivity on tissue spreading has not been rigorously investigated. Here we demonstrate that the rate of tissue spreading over a two-dimensional substratum reflects a competition or “tug-of-war” between cell–cell and cell–substratum adhesions. We have generated both a “library” of structurally related copolymeric substrata varying in their adhesivity to cells and a library of genetically engineered cell populations varying only in cohesivity. Cell–substratum adhesivity was varied through the poly(ethylene glycol) content of a series of copolymeric substrata, whereas cell–cell cohesivity was varied through the expression of the homophilic cohesion molecules N- and R-cadherin by otherwise noncohesive L929 cells. In the key experiment, multicellular aggregates containing about 600 cells were allowed to spread onto copolymeric surfaces. We compared the spreading behavior of aggregates having different levels of cell–cell cohesivity on a series of copolymeric substrata having different levels of cell–substratum adhesivity. In these experiments, cell–cell cohesivity was measured by tissue surface tensiometry, and cell–substratum adhesivity was assessed by a distractive method. Tissue spreading was assayed by confocal microscopy as the rate of cell emigration from similar-sized, fluorescence-labeled, multicellular aggregates deposited on each of the substrata. We demonstrate that either decreasing substratum adhesivity or increasing cell–cell cohesivity dramatically slowed the spreading rate of cell aggregates.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.071615398

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 245

Metadata

Authors
Ryan, P. L., Foty, R. A., Kohn, J., & Steinberg, M. S.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2001-03-27
Volume
98
Issue
8
Pages
4323-4327
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2069697346
Cited by
245
References
1
FWCI
2.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Tissue spreading on implantable substrates is a competitive outcome of cell–cell vs. cell–substratum adhesivity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.071615398
The paper
Ryan, P. L., Foty, R. A., Kohn, J., & Steinberg, M. S. (2001). Tissue spreading on implantable substrates is a competitive outcome of cell–cell vs. cell–substratum adhesivity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.071615398

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.