↓ Skip to main content

Cells Respond to Mechanical Stress by Rapid Disassembly of Caveolae

Overview of attention for article published in Cell, February 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
759 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
842 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Cells Respond to Mechanical Stress by Rapid Disassembly of Caveolae
Published in
Cell, February 2011
DOI 10.1016/j.cell.2010.12.031
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bidisha Sinha, Darius Köster, Richard Ruez, Pauline Gonnord, Michele Bastiani, Daniel Abankwa, Radu V. Stan, Gillian Butler-Browne, Benoit Vedie, Ludger Johannes, Nobuhiro Morone, Robert G. Parton, Graça Raposo, Pierre Sens, Christophe Lamaze, Pierre Nassoy

Abstract

The functions of caveolae, the characteristic plasma membrane invaginations, remain debated. Their abundance in cells experiencing mechanical stress led us to investigate their role in membrane-mediated mechanical response. Acute mechanical stress induced by osmotic swelling or by uniaxial stretching results in a rapid disappearance of caveolae, in a reduced caveolin/Cavin1 interaction, and in an increase of free caveolins at the plasma membrane. Tether-pulling force measurements in cells and in plasma membrane spheres demonstrate that caveola flattening and disassembly is the primary actin- and ATP-independent cell response that buffers membrane tension surges during mechanical stress. Conversely, stress release leads to complete caveola reassembly in an actin- and ATP-dependent process. The absence of a functional caveola reservoir in myotubes from muscular dystrophic patients enhanced membrane fragility under mechanical stress. Our findings support a new role for caveolae as a physiological membrane reservoir that quickly accommodates sudden and acute mechanical stresses.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 842 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 14 2%
United Kingdom 11 1%
France 3 <1%
Germany 3 <1%
Spain 3 <1%
Switzerland 2 <1%
India 2 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Other 4 <1%
Unknown 798 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 231 27%
Researcher 170 20%
Student > Bachelor 70 8%
Student > Master 61 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 53 6%
Other 126 15%
Unknown 131 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 275 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 189 22%
Engineering 65 8%
Physics and Astronomy 41 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 34 4%
Other 82 10%
Unknown 156 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 July 2022.
All research outputs
#15,169,543
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Cell
#15,850
of 17,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#146,917
of 193,466 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cell
#71
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,168 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 59.1. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 193,466 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.