![[Feedback]](/icons/banner/feedbackACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[For Subscribers]](/icons/banner/subscriberACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Archive]](/icons/banner/archiveACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Search]](/icons/banner/searchACT.gif){kind=icon}
|
|
|
|
|
||
A more recent version of this article appeared on June 1, 2002
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Submitted on August 9, 2001
Revised on December 12, 2001
Accepted on February 25, 2002
1 Department of Physics, The University of Illinois at Chicago,
Chicago, Illinois 60607-7059
2 Department of Bioengineering, The University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60607-7059
3 Departments of Physics and Bioengineering, The University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60607-7059
* Corresponding author. E-mail address: mpoiri1{at}uic.edu.
The bending rigidities of mitotic chromosomes isolated from cultured N. viridescens (newt) and Xenopus epithelial cells were measured by observing their spontaneous thermal bending fluctuations. When combined with simultaneous measurement of stretching elasticity, these measurements constrain models for higher-order mitotic chromosome structure. We measured bending rigidities of B ~10-22 N·m2 for newt and ~10-23 N·m2 for Xenopus chromosomes extracted from cells. A similar bending rigidity was measured for newt chromosomes in vivo by observing bending fluctuations in metaphase-arrested cells. Following each bending rigidity measurement, a stretching (Young's) modulus of the same chromosome was measured in the range of 102 to 103 Pa for newt and Xenopus chromosomes. For each chromosome, these values of B and Y are consistent with those expected for a simple elastic rod, B " YR4, where R is the chromosome cross-section radius. Our measurements rule out the possibility that chromosome stretching and bending elasticity are principally due to a stiff central core region, and are instead indicative of an internal structure which is essentially homogeneous in its connectivity across the chromosome cross-section.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  C. B. Raub, J. Unruh, V. Suresh, T. Krasieva, T. Lindmo, E. Gratton, B. J. Tromberg, and S. C. George Image Correlation Spectroscopy of Multiphoton Images Correlates with Collagen Mechanical Properties Biophys. J., March 15, 2008; 94(6): 2361 - 2373. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Raj and C. S. Peskin The influence of chromosome flexibility on chromosome transport during anaphase A PNAS, April 4, 2006; 103(14): 5349 - 5354. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. H. Pope, C. Xiong, and J. F. Marko Proteolysis of Mitotic Chromosomes Induces Gradual and Anisotropic Decondensation Correlated with a Reduction of Elastic Modulus and Structural Sensitivity to Rarely Cutting Restriction Enzymes Mol. Biol. Cell, January 1, 2006; 17(1): 104 - 113. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. J. Brouhard and A. J. Hunt Microtubule movements on the arms of mitotic chromosomes: Polar ejection forces quantified in vitro PNAS, September 27, 2005; 102(39): 13903 - 13908. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Almagro, D. Riveline, T. Hirano, B. Houchmandzadeh, and S. Dimitrov The Mitotic Chromosome Is an Assembly of Rigid Elastic Axes Organized by Structural Maintenance of Chromosomes (SMC) Proteins and Surrounded by a Soft Chromatin Envelope J. Biol. Chem., February 13, 2004; 279(7): 5118 - 5126. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. S. Belmont Mitotic chromosome scaffold structure: New approaches to an old controversy PNAS, December 10, 2002; 99(25): 15855 - 15857. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. G. Poirier and J. F. Marko From the Cover: Mitotic chromosomes are chromatin networks without a mechanically contiguous protein scaffold PNAS, November 26, 2002; 99(24): 15393 - 15397. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
