Cited by 185Cellular Mechanics and InteractionsCell Adhesion Molecules ResearchSkin and Cellular Biology Research

Shear-induced reorganization of renal proximal tubule cell actin cytoskeleton and apical junctional complexes

Open access
Duan, Yi, Gotoh, Nanami, Yan, Qingshang, Du, Zhaopeng, Weinstein, Alan M., Wang, Tong, Weinbaum, Sheldon·2008·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

In this study, we demonstrate that fluid shear stress (FSS)-induced actin cytoskeletal reorganization and junctional formation in renal epithelial cells are nearly completely opposite the corresponding changes in vascular endothelial cells (ECs) [Thi MM et al. (2004) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101:16483–16488]. Mouse proximal tubule cells (PTCs) were subjected to 5 h of FSS (1 dyn/cm 2 ) to investigate the dynamic responses of the cytoskeletal distribution of filamentous actin (F-actin), ZO-1, E-cadherin, vinculin, and paxillin to FSS. Immunofluorescence analysis revealed that FSS caused basal stress fiber disruption, more densely distributed peripheral actin bands (DPABs), and the formation of both tight junctions (TJs) and adherens junctions (AJs). A dramatic reinforcement of vinculin staining was found at the cell borders as well as the cell interior. These responses were abrogated by the actin-disrupting drug, cytochalasin D. To interpret these results, we propose a “junctional buttressing” model for PTCs in which FSS enables the DPABs, TJs, and AJs to become more tightly connected. In contrast, in the “bumper-car” model for ECs, all junctional connections were severely disrupted by FSS. This “junctional buttressing” model explains why a FSS of only 1/10 of that used in the EC study can cause a similarly dramatic, cytoskeletal response in these tall, cuboidal epithelial cells; and why junctional buttressing between adjacent cells may benefit renal epithelium in maximizing flow-activated, brush border-dependent, transcellular salt and water reabsorption.

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.0804954105

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The axial fluid shear stress experienced by proximal tubule cells in vivo is estimated to be in the range of 0.1 to 1 dyne/cm2.

    “the axial fluid shear stress experienced by proximal tubule cells in vivo is estimated to be in the range of 0.1 to 1 dyne/cm2”

    From Material-dependent oxygen transport governs ischemia-reperfusion injury and drug response in a kidney microphysiological system (2026) · cites this paper as Duan et al., 2008

    The Discussion (page unavailable in our copy) says that 1 dyn/cm² is typical of proximal tubule cells in vivo, supporting the upper end of the claimed range. It does not give 0.1 dyn/cm² as a lower bound or estimate an in vivo range of 0.1–1 dyn/cm². (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Duan, Y., Gotoh, N., Yan, Q., Du, Z., Weinstein, A. M., Wang, T., & Weinbaum, S.
Affiliations
  • City College of New York (US)
  • Yale University (US)
  • Cornell University (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2008-08-12
Volume
105
Issue
32
Pages
11418-11423
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2020773684
Cited by
185
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 8
FWCI
3.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Yale University
  • City University of New York
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R01DK062289, R01DK029857, R01DK62289-01)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Cellular Mechanics and Interactions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Immunology and Allergy › Cell Adhesion Molecules Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Skin and Cellular Biology Research
Keywords
fluid shear stress, proximal tubular epithelial cells, actin cytoskeleton, apical junctional complex, tight junctions, adherens junctions, stress fibers, ZO-1, E-cadherin, vinculin, paxillin, cytochalasin D, renal epithelium
MeSH terms
Absorption, Actins, Animals, Cells, Cultured, Cytoskeleton, Epithelial Cells, Kidney Tubules, Proximal, Membrane Proteins, Phosphoproteins, Stress, Mechanical, Cytochalasin D, Cadherins, Vinculin, Tight Junctions, Nucleic Acid Synthesis Inhibitors, Shear Strength, Mice, Paxillin, Zonula Occludens-1 Protein

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