Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Cell Growth: Internal Constraints to Growth

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    906

    Default Cell Growth: Internal Constraints to Growth

    This example is the second in a series describing the "cell growth" material in FEBio. To better understand the material presented here, please refer to the example on Single Cell Growth.

    The cell growth material is a continuum model that may be equally used to describe the growth of a single cell, or an aggregate of cells. Cell aggregates may form tissues and organs, and the cell growth model may be used for such aggregates as long as the extracellular matrix in those tissues represents a small fraction of the tissue volume. The assumption implicit in this approach is that all the cells of an aggregate are exposed to the same environmental conditions (same external osmolarity). As cells grow and divide, there is no need to explicitly account for boundaries between the cells of a cell aggregate in this continuum representation. Therefore, the model only needs to explicitly describe the growth process, not cell division.

    In the example of Single Cell Growth, there was no solid matrix associated with the cell, and thus no explicit description of the stiffness of the cell cytoskeleton. As a result of that assumption, the spherical cell maintained its spherical shape during growth. In this example, we examine how the elasticity of the cell cytoskeleton (and/or the extracellular matrix, in the case of cell aggregates forming tissues or organs) imposes internal constraints that might influence the shape of the growing structure.


    For example, consider a highly cellularized tissue that has a tubular form, such as the media layer (tunica media) of an artery. The growth of a tube may be modeled in FEBio by creating this tubular geometry, and assigning to it a "solid mixture" material consisting of a "cell growth" material, and an "orthotropic elastic" material. The "orthotropic elastic" material represents the stiffness of the solid matrix (the cell cytoskeleton and/or the extracellular matrix). Three cases are considered below, each representing a different choice of properties for the solid matrix. In all these cases, the "cell growth" model is set up to produce a fivefold increase in the intracellular membrane-impermeant solute content, cr, and the intracellular solid content, phir.

    1. Isotropic Solid Matrix
      (click on image to see movie)
      TubeGrowth.feb
      In this case, consider that the solid matrix is isotropic. As expected, the resulting growth process is isotropic, and the tube grows in size equally in all directions. The volume of the tissue does not necessarily increase fivefold, depending on the magnitude of the solid matrix stiffness relative to the osmotic driving forces produced by the growth process. In this example, the modulus of the solid matrix is on the order of 1 kPa, and the relative volume at the end of the growth is 4.995.
    2. Orthotropic Solid Matrix with Greater Axial Stiffness
      (click on image to see movie)
      TubeGrowthR.feb
      In this second case, the modulus along the length of the tube is taken to be 100 times greater than in the circumferential and radial directions (10 kPa versus 0.1 kPa). Most of the growth thus manifests itself as a radial and circumferential expansion, with negligible change in length along the axial direction.
    3. Orthotropic Solid Matrix with Greater Radial and Circumferential Stiffness
      (click on image to see movie)
      TubeGrowthZ.feb
      This third case is the reverse of the previous one: The axial modulus is 100 times smaller than in the circumferential and radial directions (0.1 kPa versus 10 kPa). Most of the growth thus manifests itself as an axial expansion, with negligible change along the radial and circumferential directions.


    These examples illustrate the fact that the anisotropy of the solid structures in the cells or their surrounding extracellular matrix may have a significant influence on the shape of the growing cells, tissues, or organs. The absolute value of the solid matrix stiffness only restricts the size of the growth, and controls the magnitude of residual stresses that might develop in the solid matrix. However, the shape is controlled by the relative magnitudes of the stiffness along various directions.

    The next example in this series illustrates the influence of External Constraints to Growth.

    Gerard
    Last edited by ateshian; 03-25-2012 at 07:48 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    8

    Default

    Hi Gerard,
    I am interested in using a simple growth model for the tube example presented in internal constraints to growth. I scaled the mesh to a size more typical of a child's bronchi because that is the tissue I am interested in modeling. However, the scaled model does not converge very well and usually fails after about 10% of the load steps. I tried the same analysis parameters as in the internal constraints to growth model. Any thoughts?
    Thanks, Scott

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    906

    Default

    Hi Scott,

    Do you mind emailing me the model? It would be easier to debug that way.

    Best,

    Gerard

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •