Integrative Biology Accepted Manuscript

This is an Accepted Manuscript, which has been through the Royal Society of Chemistry peer review process and has been accepted for publication.

Accepted Manuscripts are published online shortly after acceptance, before technical editing, formatting and proof reading. Using this free service, authors can make their results available to the community, in citable form, before we publish the edited article. We will replace this Accepted Manuscript with the edited and formatted Advance Article as soon as it is available.

You can find more information about Accepted Manuscripts in the Information for Authors.

Please note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the text and/or graphics, which may alter content. The journal’s standard Terms & Conditions and the Ethical guidelines still apply. In no event shall the Royal Society of Chemistry be held responsible for any errors or omissions in this Accepted Manuscript or any consequences arising from the use of any information it contains.

www.rsc.org/ibiology Page 1 of 30 Integrative Biology

It has become widely recognized in the field of mechanobiology that cell behavior is regulated by physical parameters of the niche, including its stiffness. While critical observations have been made regarding the molecular details of this regulation, e.g. translocation of YAP/TAZ, the or complexes that actually convert biophysical to biochemical signals that the cell can interpret remain uncertain. Here we have developed an assay that enables one to predict which proteins could be mechanically sensitive by determining their effect on stem cell differentiation (although other metrics could be substituted). We then identify several focal adhesion mechanosensors and validate them using conventional molecular biology methods.

Manuscript Accepted Biology Integrative Integrative Biology Page 2 of 30

1 High content image analysis of focal adhesion-dependent mechanosensitive stem cell

2 differentiation

3 Andrew W. Holle 1†, Alistair J. McIntyre 1, Jared Kehe 1, Piyumi Wijesekara 1, Jennifer L.

4 Young 1†, Ludovic G. Vincent 1, and Adam J. Engler 1,2*

5

6 1Department of Bioengineering, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA

7 2Sanford Consortium for Regenerative Medicine, La Jolla, CA, USA

8 *Corresponding Author: 9500 Gilman Drive, MC 0695

9 La Jolla, CA 92093 Manuscript

10 [email protected]

11 858-246-0678

12 †Current Address: Department of New Materials and Biosystems, Max Planck Institute

13 for Intelligent Systems, Stuttgart, Germany Accepted

14

15 Running Title: “Focal adhesion proteins and mechanosensitive differentiation”

16 Keywords: SORBS1, ponsin, stiffness, hydrogel Biology

17

18 Manuscript Information:

19 Abstract: 174 words

20 Body: 6294 words (including references and figure legends) Integrative 21 Figures: 5

22 Supplemental Figures: 5

23 Supplemental Tables: 3

Page 3 of 30 Integrative Biology

24 Abstract

25 Human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs) receive differentiation cues from a number of

26 stimuli, including extracellular matrix (ECM) stiffness. The pathways used to sense

27 stiffness and other physical cues are just now being understood and include proteins

28 within focal adhesions. To rapidly advance the pace of discovery for novel

29 mechanosensitive proteins, we employed a combination of in silico and high throughput

30 in vitro methods to analyze 47 different focal adhesion proteins for cryptic kinase binding

31 sites. High content imaging of hMSCs treated with small interfering RNAs for the top 6

32 candidate proteins showed novel effects on both osteogenic and myogenic differentiation; Manuscript

33 and SORBS1 were necessary for stiffness-mediated myogenic and osteogenic

34 differentiation, respectively. Both of these proteins bound to MAPK1 (also known as

35 ERK2), suggesting that it plays a context-specific role in mechanosensing for each

36 lineage; validation for these sites was performed. This high throughput system, while Accepted

37 specifically built to analyze stiffness-mediated stem cell differentiation, can be expanded

38 to other physical cues to more broadly assess mechanical signaling and increase the pace

39 of sensor discovery. Biology

40 Integrative

Integrative Biology Page 4 of 30

41 Introduction

42 Although physical properties of the niche have become widely recognized for their

43 influence on a host of cell behaviors 1-3, significant attention has been paid to the

44 influence of extracellular matrix (ECM) stiffness on stem cells 4-6. While initially

45 reported to be myosin contractility sensitive 7, their upstream mechanisms have remained

46 unclear. Recently, however, mechanisms have been proposed involving the nucleus 8,

47 translocation of factors to the nucleus 9, Rho GTPases 10 , stretch activated channels 11 ,

48 and focal adhesions, i.e. “molecular strain gauges” 12 . While numerous mechanisms may

49 overlap, it is clear from these examples that many sensors within each category are still Manuscript

50 undetermined.

51

52 High throughput systems 13 to assess mechano-signaling have yet to play as significant a

53 role as they have in other biomedical and engineering contexts, e.g. biomaterial Accepted

54 microarrays to explore niche conditions 14,15 and microcontact printing to explore the

55 influence of cell shape 16 ; this may be due to fabrication limitations with small volume

56 hydrogels, imaging limitations with thick hydrogels at high magnification, and biological Biology

57 limitations with high throughput molecular screening in stem cells. For example,

58 hydrogels are often fabricated in larger 6- and 24-well formats 7,17,18 and have been used

59 to investigate how a variety of niche properties influence cells 19 . Creating

60 physiologically relevant substrates in small volumes to elicit appropriate cell behaviors is Integrative 61 challenging but not unprecedented 20 ; ensuring that the imaging plane is flat in such small

62 wells, however, has proven difficult and has limited high resolution imaging required for

63 many stem cell applications. Several groups have pursued high throughput imaging of

Page 5 of 30 Integrative Biology

64 cells on soft surfaces 21,22 , although these efforts were performed in open culture systems

65 where media interacting with cells on one surface condition was free to diffuse to cells on

66 other surface conditions. Despite these challenges, it is clear that discovery of novel

67 proteins that convert mechanical forces into biochemical signals, e.g. phosphorylation,

68 will require screening due to the sheer number of proteins that could be involved in each

69 mechanism type 8-12 .

70

71 To create a high throughput screen of potential mechanosensing proteins and determine

72 their effects on stem cells, high content screening analysis of multiple cell parameters for Manuscript

73 phenotyping 23,24 is required in addition to high throughput screening systems 25 . While

74 this combination has been used in pre-fabricated small interfering RNA (siRNA) 26 or

75 polymer arrays 15 to examine stem cell pluripotency, their combination in a high

76 throughput array to study mechanically sensitive stem cell differentiation has been Accepted

77 technically challenging. Attempts to leverage high throughput hydrogel systems with

78 high content imaging has been limited by an inability to perform high magnification

79 single cell imaging or investigate the immunofluorescence expression of individual Biology

80 transcription factors 20,27 .

81

82 Here, we have overcome the imaging challenges associated with the 96 well hydrogel

83 array format 20 and combined it with a focal adhesion siRNA screen to determine novel Integrative 84 proteins that convert mechanical forces into biochemical responses, whether acting as

85 direct or indirect transducers of force. We report the identification of several hits

86 that may regulate lineage-specific, substrate stiffness dependent differentiation.

Integrative Biology Page 6 of 30

87

88 Experimental

89 Cell Culture and Reagents

90 Human mesenchymal stem cells (Lonza) were maintained in growth medium (DMEM,

91 10% FBS, 100 U/mL penicillin, and 100 µg/mL streptomycin) which was changed every

92 four days (except in 96 well plates). Only low passage hMSCs were used for

93 experimental studies, i.e. less than passage 9. For MAPK1 inhibition, the MAPK1

94 inhibitor pyrazolylpyrrole, dissolved in DMSO, was used at a final concentration of 2 nM

95 and added to cells immediately post-plating. At 2 nM, pyrazolylpyrrole is extremely Manuscript

96 selective and has only been shown to inhibit MAPK1, limiting potential off-target effects

97 28 . Non-differentiation based experiments, including western blots and durotaxis assays,

98 were performed after 24 hours while siRNA-induced protein knockdown was at a

99 maximum. Conversely, differentiation experiments took place over the course of four Accepted

100 days, since differentiation occurs as the integration of cues over time. Cells were plated

101 at a density of 500 cells/cm 2, a sparse density that reduces the likelihood of density-

102 dependent cell signaling over the course of the experiment. Biology

103

104 Polyacrylamide Hydrogel Fabrication in 6- and 96-Well Formats

105 For MAPK1 inhibitor experiments performed in six well plates, acrylamide was

106 polymerized on aminosilanized coverslips. A solution containing the crosslinker N, N’ Integrative 107 methylene-bis-acrylamide, the monomer acrylamide, 1/100 volume 10% Ammonium

108 Persulfate and 1/1000 volume of N, N, N’, N’-Tetramethylethylenediamine was mixed.

109 Two different combinations of acrylamide and bis-acrylamide were used to make

Page 7 of 30 Integrative Biology

110 hydrogels of 11 and 34 kilopascal (kPa; a unit of stiffness). Approximately 50 µL of the

111 mixed solution was placed between 25 mm diameter aminosilanized coverslips and a

112 chlorosilanized glass slide for 6-well plates. 100 µg/mL collagen I was chemically

113 crosslinked to the substrates using the photoactivatable crosslinker Sulfo-SANPAH

114 (Pierce). Custom 96 well plates containing collagen type I-conjugated polyacrylamide

115 hydrogels crosslinked to glass bottom surfaces (Matrigen) were fabricated containing

116 equal numbers of 15 kPa wells and 42 kPa hydrogels to induce myogenesis and

117 osteogenesis, respectively (Figure S1A). Stiffness values were verified using an MFP3D-

118 Bio atomic force microscope (Asylum Research, Santa Barbara, CA) using previously Manuscript

119 established methods (Figure S1B) 29,30 . Polyacrylamide gel thickness was also verified

120 using a BD CARV II confocal microscope (Figure S1C,D) and found to be approximately

121 250 µm, which is thick enough that the cells are unable to feel the glass substrate below

122 the gel 31 . Accepted

123

124 siRNA Transfection

125 siRNA oligonucleotides against human Vinculin, p130Cas, SORBS1 (Ponsin), SORBS3 Biology

126 (Vinexin), Palladin, , and Filamin (ON-TARGETplus SMARTpool; Thermo

127 Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA) and a pool of four non-targeting siRNAs control

128 oligonucleotides (ON-TARGETplus siControl; Dharmacon), diluted in DEPC water

129 (OmniPure, EMD) and 5X siRNA buffer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA), Integrative 130 were transiently transfected into human hMSCs using Dharmafect 1 (Thermo Fisher

131 Scientific, Waltham, MA) at an optimized concentration of 50 nM in low serum

132 antibiotic free growth media, according to the manufacturers’ protocols. Specific siRNA

Integrative Biology Page 8 of 30

133 sequences can be found in Supplemental Table 1. Protein knockdown was characterized

134 by western blot and immunofluorescence. After 24 hours of transfection in antibiotic-

135 free media (2% FBS), media was replaced with standard hMSC growth media and cells

136 replated onto appropriate substrates.

137

138 Plasmid Transfection

139 pEGFP-C1 sub-cloned with complete Vinculin cDNA, which had been originally excised

140 from p1005 with EcoRI and inserted in EcoRI digested pEGFP-C1 (labeled as FL), was

141 obtained from Dr. Susan Craig 32 . L765I mutant Vinculin plasmids were obtained via Manuscript

142 site-directed mutagenesis on FL Vinculin plasmids. All plasmids were purified using

143 QIAGEN Plasmid Midi Kit (Qiagen). hMSCs were transfected in antibiotic-free medium

144 with 1 mg of plasmid precomplexed with 2 µl of Lipofectamine 2000 (Life Technologies)

145 in 100 µl of DMEM. After 24 hours of transfection in antibiotic-free media with 2% FBS, Accepted

146 media was replaced with standard hMSC growth media.

147

148 Immunofluorescence Biology

149 hMSCs were fixed with 3.7% formaldehyde for 30 minutes at 4 oC and permeabilized

150 with 1% Triton-X for 5 minutes at 37 oC. The cells were then stained with primary

151 antibodies against human MyoD (sc-32758, Santa Cruz), Myf5 (sc-302, Santa Cruz,

152 Dallas, TX), Osterix (ab22552, Abcam), CBFA1 (RUNX2) (sc-101145, Santa Cruz), Integrative 153 Vinculin (ab129002, Abcam), p130Cas (ab108320, Abcam), SORBS1 (ab4551, Abcam),

154 SORBS3 (GTX-115362, Genetex), Filamin (ab51217, Abcam), or Paxillin (ab32084,

155 Abcam). Corresponding secondary antibodies were conjugated to Alexa Fluor 488

Page 9 of 30 Integrative Biology

156 (FITC) or Alexa Fluor 647 (Cy5) (Invitrogen). Nuclei were counterstained with Hoechst

157 dye (Sigma), and the actin was stained with rhodamine-conjugated

158 phalloidin (Invitrogen). Cells not plated in 96 well plates were imaged with a Nikon

159 Eclipse Ti-S inverted fluorescence microscope equipped with a BD Carv II camera.

160

161 High Content Imaging and Analysis

162 96 well plates were imaged on a CV1000 Cell Voyager (Yokogawa). Briefly, images

163 were acquired through 5 z-positions with 10 µm step sizes at 25 different points in each

164 well with three different filter sets (FITC, TXRD, and DAPI). Maximum Intensity Manuscript

165 Projections (MIPs) were constructed from the resulting stitched z-stacks to account for

166 uneven, slanted, or differentially swollen hydrogel surfaces and analyzed using a semi-

167 automated image analysis pipeline in CellProfiler 33 . Nuclear outlines were obtained as

168 primary objects with automatic Otsu Global thresholding (Figure S2A) and cell outlines Accepted

169 were obtained using the TXRD channel as secondary objects using a Watershed Gradient

170 algorithm (Figure S2B). The pipeline calculated morphological attributes (such as cell

171 area, aspect ratio, and eccentricity) for each cell, as well as the mean and integrated Biology

172 density of the FITC channel signal in nuclei, cell outlines, and cytoplasm outlines. From

173 these data, one could distinguish cells with nuclear expression only, cytoplasm

174 expression only, uniform positive expression, and uniform negative expression, as shown

175 with example cells in Figure S2C. Data analysis was performed with Microsoft Excel, Integrative 176 GraphPad Prism, and CellAnalyst 34 .

177

178 Western Blots

Integrative Biology Page 10 of 30

179 Cell lysates were collected by rinsing samples with cold PBS, followed by a five minute

180 lysis in mRIPA buffer (50 mM HEPES pH 7.5, 150 mM NaCl, 1.5 mM MgCl2, 1%

181 Triton, 1% Na-DOC, 0.1% SDS) with 1 mM EGTA, 1 mM Na3VO4, 10 mM Na4P2O7,

182 and 1 mM PMSF (protease inhibitors). Cell lysates were separated via SDS-PAGE,

183 transferred to PVDF membranes (Bio-Rad), and washed in Buffer A (25 mM Tris-HCl,

184 150 mM NaCl, 0.1% Tween-20) + 4% SeaBlock (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham,

185 MA) overnight at 4 oC. Membranes were incubated with anti-Vinculin (ab18058,

186 Abcam), GAPDH (ab8245, Abcam), ERK2 (ab7948, Abcam), p130Cas (ab108320,

187 Abcam), SORBS1 (ab4551, Abcam), SORBS3 (GTX-115362, Genetex), Filamin Manuscript

188 (ab51217, Abcam), or Paxillin (ab32084, Abcam) antibodies for 1 hour, washed with

189 Buffer A containing SeaBlock, and incubated in streptavidin horseradish-peroxidase-

190 conjugated secondary antibodies (Bio-Rad) for 30 minutes at room temperature.

191 Immunoblots were visualized using ECL reagent (Pierce). All western blot antibodies Accepted

192 were obtained from Abcam (Cambridge, England).

193

194 Quantitative PCR Biology

195 mRNA was isolated from hMSCs grown after 4 days with Trizol, and subsequently

196 treated with chloroform and precipitated with isopropanol. The cell lysate was

197 centrifuged and the pellet washed in ethanol twice, after which the pellet was allowed to

198 dry before resuspension in DEPC water. cDNA was assembled through reverse Integrative 199 transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for one hour at 37 oC, followed by a 5

200 minute inactivation step at 99 oC. 1 µL of the resulting cDNA mixture was added to 12.5

201 µL SYBR Green Real Time PCR Master Mix (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA)

Page 11 of 30 Integrative Biology

202 containing 0.25 nM forward and reverse primers (Supplemental Table 2) and enough

203 DEPC water to bring the total reaction volume per well to 25 µL.

204

205 Immunoprecipitation

206 Cell lysates were collected with a non-denaturing lysis buffer (20 mM Tris-HCl pH 8,

207 127 mM NaCl, 1% Nonidet P-40, 2 mM EDTA). Anti-ERK2 antibody (Abcam

208 ab124362) was bound to protein G-conjugated Dynabeads (Life Technologies, Carlsbad,

209 CA, USA) for 1 hour at 4 oC with gentle agitation. Beads were magnetically captured, the

210 supernatant removed, and the pellet incubated overnight at 4 oC before Western Blot Manuscript

211 analysis.

212

213 Statistics

214 All experiments were performed in triplicate with the indicated number of cells analyzed Accepted

215 per condition. Error bars shown are the standard error of the mean (SEM). Significance

216 was assessed with Bonferroni’s Multiple Comparison Test at a significance threshold of

217 p<0.05 or lower as indicated. Values less than 0.1 were noted. For instances where data is Biology

218 not significantly different, N.S. is stated.

219

220 Results

221 Bioinformatic Assessment of Focal Adhesion-based Mechanosensing Reveals that Integrative 222 MAPK1 Binding is Frequent and Cryptic

223 We selected 47 focal adhesion proteins 35,36 (Supplemental Table 3) based on their ability

224 to bind multiple proteins at their N- and C-terminal ends such that they could potentially

Integrative Biology Page 12 of 30

225 be unfolded when one end of the protein is displaced relative to the other, i.e. a

226 “molecular strain sensor” 12 . These candidates were analyzed with ScanSite 37 , a tool

227 designed to identify short protein sequence binding motifs and predict whether the motif

228 is surface accessible. After analyzing all 47 proteins, a scatter plot showing the number

229 of times a predicted binding site was found versus the average accessibility of the

230 identified sites was constructed (Figure 1A, Supplemental Table 3). Interestingly,

231 predicted MAPK1 binding sites were found most frequently and with the second-lowest

232 average accessibility, implying that MAPK1 is the most likely candidate to affect stem

233 cell differentiation across a wide variety of cellular pathways in a manner that requires a Manuscript

234 change in surface accessibility of the MAPK1 binding site.

235

236 MAPK1 Inhibition Prevents Mechanosensitive Stem Cell Myogenesis and Osteogenesis

237 To analyze the effect of MAPK1 inhibition on substrate stiffness-directed hMSC Accepted

238 differentiation, MAPK1 was inhibited with pyrazolylpyrrole, an extremely potent and

239 selective MAPK1 inhibitor 38 , immediately post plating in order to limit any early

39

240 mechanosensing events, which can occur on the time scale of minutes . Consistent with Biology

241 previous results 17 , we found that hMSCs exhibited a 50% reduction in nuclear-localized

242 myogenic transcription factors MyoD and Myf5 after 4 days in culture (Figure 1B). On

243 34 kPa substrates, pyrazolylpyrrole-treated hMSCs also exhibited reduced osteogenic

244 transcription factor expression and localization (Figure 1B). However, since Integrative 245 pyrazolylpyrrole is a global MAPK1 inhibitor, it may inadvertently reduce lineage

246 commitment through non-stiffness mediated mechanisms.

Page 13 of 30 Integrative Biology

247 To address this, the potentially upstream focal adhesion proteins identified by ScanSite

248 were investigated further. Of the proteins analyzed, five–Vinculin, p130Cas, Filamin,

249 SORBS1 (Ponsin), SORBS3 (Vinexin)–had a predicted cryptic MAPK1 binding site and

250 terminal multiple binding sites to other proteins, which would allow the protein to be

251 strained and change configuration under an appropriate amount of force, F* (Figure 1C).

252 This conformation change could then expose the MAPK1 binding site predicted to be

253 cryptic, but only under the appropriate amount of force. Paxillin was selected as a

254 control protein because it did not have a cryptic MAPK1 binding site (Figure S3).

255 siRNAs were used to transiently knock down candidate proteins, which was verified by Manuscript

256 western blot (Figure 2A) and immunofluorescence (Figure 2B-C). siRNA-induced

257 knockdown of these proteins did not affect endogenous expression of MAPK1 (Figure

258 S5).

259 Accepted

260 To analyze whether siRNA-induced knockdown of the five candidate proteins could alter

261 mechanically-sensitive myogenic and osteogenic differentiation, hMSCs were cultured in

262 96 well plates containing polyacrylamide hydrogels of roughly 250 µm thickness and Biology

263 stiffness of either 15 kPa (myogenic) or 42 kPa (osteogenic) for four days (Figure S1).

264 These stiffness values are within the characteristic ranges of myogenic- and osteogenic-

265 inducing 2D substrates 7,40-42 . To analyze osteogenesis, cells in the 42 kPa wells were

266 fixed and stained for the osteogenic transcription factors Osterix and CBFA1, while for Integrative 267 myogenesis, cells in the 15 kPa wells were fixed and stained for the myogenic

268 transcription factors MyoD and Myf5. Expression levels for the transcription factors

269 were compared with those in untreated cells at day 0 (negative control) and at day 4

Integrative Biology Page 14 of 30

270 (positive control) on the corresponding stiffness hydrogels. Transcription factors were

271 specifically chosen as outputs for identifying mechanosensitivity because both the

272 expression and nuclear localization could be used as criteria for lineage commitment

273 (Figure S2). To further reduce the false discovery rate, we only classified a protein as a

274 mechanosensor if their knockdown impaired stiffness-induced differentiation as assessed

275 by both transcription factors. As transcription factor expression is often sequential, this

276 reduces the likelihood that the assay simply missed the time when the transcription factor

277 was active.

278 Manuscript

279 In the osteogenesis assay, we found that p130Cas, Filamin, Paxillin, and SORBS3

280 (Vinexin) knockdown did not affect osteogenic differentiation signals after 4 days

281 relative to day 0 expression and localization. Conversely, the knockdown of SORBS1

282 (Ponsin), which interacts with Vinculin 43 and plays a role in signaling 44 , reduced Accepted

283 both CBFA1 and Osterix nuclear expression by over 50%. Vinculin knockdown, which

284 was previously shown to not affect CBFA1 expression 17 , slightly reduced CBFA1 but

285 not Osterix expression (Figure 3); no myogenic expression was found in these cells (data Biology

286 not shown). Thus, we concluded that SORBS1 could act as a unique stiffness-mediated

287 sensor for osteogenic differentiation.

288

289 In the myogenesis assay, siRNA knockdown of Vinculin, p130Cas, or SORBS3 resulted Integrative 290 in a loss of stiffness-induced expression of both MyoD and Myf5 at day 4. This is in

291 agreement with recent reports of Vinculin-mediated SORBS3 mechanosensing 45 .

292 However, Filamin, SORBS1, and Paxillin only reduced expression of one of the two

Page 15 of 30 Integrative Biology

293 myogenic markers (Figure 4). Paxillin does not contain a cryptic MAPK1 binding site,

294 so Myf5 reduction may be due to other predicted cryptic binding domains that it contains,

295 e.g. MAPK3; no osteogenic expression was found in these cells (data not shown). Thus,

296 we concluded that Vinculin could act as a unique stiffness-mediated sensor for myogenic

297 differentiation, consistent with prior reports 17 .

298

299 If knockdown of the candidate focal adhesion proteins disrupts not just mechanosensitive

300 signaling but also other normal cell behaviors, stiffness-mediated differentiation

301 differences may not solely be related to signaling. High content image analysis was Manuscript

302 performed with CellProfiler to measure cell area and morphology, i.e. eccentricity, of

303 cells from all conditions. Neither area nor morphology was altered by any of the siRNA

304 treatments (Figure S4A-B). Cell migration speed was also unaffected by siRNA

305 knockdown, although SORBS3 knockdown appeared to increase migration persistence Accepted

306 (Figure S4C). Perhaps most importantly, focal adhesion assembly in terms of size and

307 distribution appeared unaffected in single knockdown experiments; outside of the

308 expected loss of expression of the proteins being knocked down, no changes were Biology

309 observed in these focal adhesion characteristics (Figure S4D). Differentiation changes

310 could also be due to off-target effects of the siRNA on MAPK1 expression, thus

311 depleting the endogenous pool of the sensor’s binding partner and inadvertently

312 preventing differentiation. However, MAPK1 western blots indicated that knockdown did Integrative 313 not impact endogenous expression (Figure S5), reinforcing the concept that individual

314 mechanosensing proteins regulated transcription factor expression.

315

Integrative Biology Page 16 of 30

316 Validation of Candidate Mechanosensor Hits for MAPK1 Interaction

317 To verify hits directly using more targeted molecular methods, SORBS1 was

318 immunoprecipated via MAPK1. For hMSCs cultured for 24 hours on 34 kPa PA gels,

319 SORBS1 was detected in the pellet but not the unconcentrated whole cell lysate,

320 suggesting that, although expressed at low levels, SORBS1 and MAPK1 interact in cells

321 cultured on physiological-stiffness gels (Figure 5A). SORBS1 contains two predicted

322 binding sites for MAPK1 at L500 and L1033 (Figure S2B), but among the twelve

323 SORBS1 isoforms, only two contain the predicted L1033 binding site 46-48 . qPCR

324 indicated that undifferentiated cells cultured on 34 kPa substrates for 24 hours did not Manuscript

325 significantly express SORBS1 isoforms containing L1033 (Figure 5B). Lacking other

326 kinase binding domains predicted with high confidence to be inaccessible (i.e. Scansite

327 accessibility prediction less than 0.5), the MAPK1 binding site found on SORBS1 at

328 L500 is the most likely candidate to act as a stretch sensitive mechanosensor. For Accepted

329 Vinculin, which pulls MAPK1 down with immunoprecipitation on 11 kPa substrates 17 ,

330 MAPK1 binding was predicted at L765 (Figure S2B). To confirm that L765 is

331 specifically required for myogenic differentiation on 11 kPa substrates, a plasmid Biology

332 containing L765I-mutated Vinculin and Green Fluorescent Protein (GFP) was added back

333 to cells that had been treated with Vinculin siRNA. While Vinculin knockdown was

334 sufficient to reduce myogenic transcription factor expression in hMSCs, addback of full-

335 length Vinculin rescued expression whereas addback of L765I-mutated Vinculin was Integrative 336 insufficient to fully rescue expression (Figure 5C, filled vs. open arrowhead,

337 respectively).

338

Page 17 of 30 Integrative Biology

339 Discussion

340 While these data specifically focus on screening 47 focal adhesion proteins with a

341 “molecular strain sensor”-like structure as predicted by ScanSite, some of which have

342 never been identified as mechanically sensitive, the list of proteins comprising focal

343 adhesions is much larger and dynamic. Current estimates implicate as many as 232

344 different components, of which 148 are intrinsic and 84 are transient 49 , as a common

345 signature of adhesions. Recent analyses of focal adhesions have even identified more

346 than 1300 distinct proteins within isolated adhesion complexes 50 , suggesting exceedingly

347 complex adhesion-based mechanisms for cells that must actively sense their Manuscript

348 surroundings. Focal adhesion composition and structure have also recently been shown

349 to be relatively stable to external perturbation, including siRNA knockdown or chemical

350 inhibition of components, suggesting that signaling transduction occurs independently of

351 structural integrity 51 . That said, our data also focused on proteins with relatively little Accepted

352 functional data, e.g. SORBS1, to establish proof-of-principle that we can use a high

353 content imaging based platform to identify candidate sensors via their influence on stem

354 cell differentiation. Biology

355

356 Prior to this work, SORBS1, also known as Ponsin, Sorbin, CAP, or c-Cbl associated

357 protein, has not been implicated in mechanosensitive differentiation, although it has been

358 shown to affect actin cytoskeleton organization via Dynamin GTPases 52 , bind to vinculin Integrative 359 43 , and be overexpressed and phosphorylated in response to endogenous PYK2

360 expression, a focal adhesion complex-localized kinase capable of suppressing

361 osteogenesis 53 .

Integrative Biology Page 18 of 30

362

363 Even with a fairly well studied focal adhesion protein like Vinculin, questions about its

364 force-sensitive behavior remain. Vinculin undergoes a conformational change from its

365 autoinhibited state to an ‘activated’ state in which it can bind F-actin, allowing it to

366 transmit force from the cytoskeleton 54 . Studies have shown that vinculin is under

367 mechanical tension within focal adhesions, although the activating conformational

368 change is separable from the application of force across the protein 55 . Recent work has

369 revealed that this tension is independent of substrate stiffness 56 , suggesting that vinculin’s

370 upstream binding partner talin may bear the brunt of force sensing. Intriguingly, talin’s Manuscript

371 unfolding under force is sufficient to expose differential amounts of cryptic vinculin

372 binding sites 57 , meaning that differential amounts of (potentially force-sensitive) vinculin

373 activation can initiate different differentiation pathways. Thus, it is possible that the

374 exposure of the cryptic MAPK1 domain in vinculin occurs after activation, and after talin Accepted

375 and actin binding, in a force dependent manner. While adding a Talin knockdown to our

376 screen would serve as an effective positive control, attempts at siRNA-induced talin

377 knockdown have led to a loss in normal cell morphology (data not shown), likely because Biology

378 of the key structural role it plays in linking the cytoskeleton to focal adhesions.

379

380 Beyond stem cell differentiation assays, several alternative high throughput techniques

381 have been adapted for mechanobiology sensor identification 58 though they do not Integrative 382 utilized biomimetic substrates. For example, mass spectroscopy “cysteine shotgun”

383 assays use cysteine-binding dyes to assess differential protein labeling under stress 59 but

384 this approach focuses on the conformational change itself and may overlook downstream

Page 19 of 30 Integrative Biology

385 signaling changes. Even when applied directly to differential unfolding in response to

386 mechanical signals 60 , one could miss transient protein unfolding during signal

387 transduction, especially if cryptic binding domains do not contain cysteine residues.

388 While this RNAi screening approach is more targeted, it can be adapted to fit any

389 instance in which immunofluorescence is used to measure an output, e.g. a response to

390 change in substrate stiffness, and can be specific for nuclear or cytoplasmic expression

391 (Figure S2).

392

393 Conclusions Manuscript

394 A computational approach was used to select candidate proteins that could potentially

395 play a role in MAPK1-based mechanosensitive differentiation based on an analysis of

396 their binding partners and presence of cryptic signaling sites, i.e. the “molecular strain

397 gauge” structure 12 . A high throughput, high content analysis based system capable of Accepted

398 finding hits much more quickly and efficiently was then constructed to test these

399 candidates, with which we identified SORBS1 and Vinculin as potential mechanosensors

400 in hMSCs. While this method was applied specifically to the mechanical influence of Biology

401 stiffness on stem cells differentiation, it can be applied to a number of applications in cell

402 biology in which an immunofluorescently-labeled marker is differentially up- or down-

403 regulated in response to a physical stimulus, e.g. stiffness, etc.

404 Integrative 405 Acknowledgements

406 The authors would like to acknowledge Dr. Jamie Kasuboski for assistance with high

407 content imaging and Dr. Brenton Hoffman for helpful comments on the manuscript. This

Integrative Biology Page 20 of 30

408 work was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health (DP2OD006460 to

409 A.J.E.) and National Science Foundation (1463689 to A.J.E) as well as a National

410 Science Foundation predoctoral fellowship (to L.G.V.)

411

412 References

413 1 A. Curtis and C. Wilkinson, Biomaterials , 1997, 18 , 1573–1583. 414 2 Y. Sun, C. S. Chen and J. Fu, Annu. Rev. Biophys. , 2012, 41 , 519–542. 415 3 D. E. Discher, P. Janmey and Y.-L. Wang, Science , 2005, 310 , 1139–1143. 416 4 W. L. Murphy, T. C. McDevitt and A. J. Engler, Nat Mater , 2014, 13 , 547–557. 417 5 F. Gattazzo, A. Urciuolo and P. Bonaldo, Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - 418 General Subjects , 2014, 1840 , 2506–2519. 419 6 D. E. Discher, D. J. Mooney and P. W. Zandstra, Science , 2009, 324 , 1673–1677. Manuscript 420 7 A. J. Engler, S. Sen, H. L. Sweeney and D. E. Discher, Cell , 2006, 126 , 677–689. 421 8 J. Swift, I. L. Ivanovska, A. Buxboim, T. Harada, P. C. D. P. Dingal, J. Pinter, J. D. 422 Pajerowski, K. R. Spinler, J. W. Shin, M. Tewari, F. Rehfeldt, D. W. Speicher and 423 D. E. Discher, Science , 2013, 341 , 1240104–1240104. 424 9 S. Dupont, L. Morsut, M. Aragona, E. Enzo, S. Giulitti, M. Cordenonsi, F. 425 Zanconato, J. Le Digabel, M. Forcato, S. Bicciato, N. Elvassore and S. Piccolo, 426 Nature , 2011, 474 , 179–183. 427 10 A. R. Cameron, J. E. Frith, G. A. Gomez, A. S. Yap and J. J. Cooper-White, Accepted 428 Biomaterials , 2014, 35 , 1857–1868. 429 11 M. M. Pathak, J. L. Nourse, T. Tran, J. Hwe, J. Arulmoli, D. T. T. Le, E. Bernardis, 430 L. A. Flanagan and F. Tombola, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. , 2014, 111 , 16148– 431 16153. 432 12 A. W. Holle and A. J. Engler, Current Opinion in Biotechnology , 2011, 22 , 648–

433 654. Biology 434 13 J.-H. Zhang, T. D. Y. Chung and K. R. Oldenburg, J Biomol Screen , 1999, 4, 67–73. 435 14 A. Ranga, S. Gobaa, Y. Okawa, K. Mosiewicz, A. Negro and M. P. Lutolf, Nature 436 Communications , 2014, 5. 437 15 Y. Mei, K. Saha, S. R. Bogatyrev, J. Yang, A. L. Hook, Z. I. Kalcioglu, S.-W. Cho, 438 M. Mitalipova, N. Pyzocha, F. Rojas, K. J. Van Vliet, M. C. Davies, M. R. 439 Alexander, R. Langer, R. Jaenisch and D. G. Anderson, Nat Mater , 2010, 9, 768– 440 778. 441 16 J. Lee, A. A. Abdeen, D. Zhang and K. A. Kilian, Biomaterials , 2013, 34 , 8140–

442 8148. Integrative 443 17 A. W. Holle, X. Tang, D. Vijayraghavan, L. G. Vincent, A. Fuhrmann, Y. S. Choi, J. 444 C. Álamo and A. J. Engler, Stem Cells , 2013, 31 , 2467–2477. 445 18 J. N. Lakins, A. R. Chin and V. M. Weaver, in Cell Migration- Textbook , eds. C. M. 446 Wells and M. Parsons, Humana Press, Totowa, NJ, 2012, vol. 916, pp. 317–350. 447 19 R. Ayala, C. Zhang, D. Yang, Y. Hwang, A. Aung, S. S. Shroff, F. T. Arce, R. Lal,

Page 21 of 30 Integrative Biology

448 G. Arya and S. Varghese, Biomaterials , 2011, 32 , 3700–3711. 449 20 J. D. Mih, A. S. Sharif, F. Liu, A. Marinkovic, M. M. Symer and D. J. 450 Tschumperlin, PLoS ONE , 2011, 6, e19929. 451 21 S. Gobaa, S. Hoehnel, M. Roccio, A. Negro, S. Kobel and M. P. Lutolf, Nature 452 Methods , 2011, 8, 949–955. 453 22 H. V. Unadkat, M. Hulsman, K. Cornelissen, B. J. Papenburg, R. K. Truckenmüller, 454 A. E. Carpenter, M. Wessling, G. F. Post, M. Uetz, M. J. T. Reinders, D. 455 Stamatialis, C. A. van Blitterswijk and J. de Boer, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. , 456 2011, 108 , 16565–16570. 457 23 F. Gasparri, Expert Opin. Drug Discov. , 2009, 4, 643–657. 458 24 C. Conrad, H. Erfle, P. Warnat, N. Daigle, T. Lörch, J. Ellenberg, R. Pepperkok and 459 R. Eils, Genome Res. , 2004, 14 , 1130–1136. 460 25 L. M. Mayr and D. Bojanic, Current Opinion in Pharmacology , 2009, 9, 580–588. 461 26 H. Erfle, B. Neumann, U. Liebel, P. Rogers, M. Held, T. Walter, J. Ellenberg and R. 462 Pepperkok, Nature Protocols , 2007, 2, 392–399. 463 27 Y. H. Yang, T.-L. Hsieh, A. T.-Q. Ji, W.-T. Hsu, C. Y. Liu, O. K. S. Lee and J. H. 464 C. Ho, Stem Cells , 2016. Manuscript 465 28 Alex M Aronov, Christopher Baker, Guy W Bemis, Jingrong Cao, Guanjing Chen, 466 Pamella J Ford, Ursula A Germann, Jeremy Green, Michael R Hale, Marc Jacobs, 467 James W Janetka, Francois Maltais, Gabriel Martinez-Botella, Mark N Namchuk, 468 Judy Straub, A. Qing Tang and X. Xie, J. Med. Chem. , 2007, 50 , 1280–1287. 469 29 G. Kaushik, A. Fuhrmann, A. Cammarato and A. J. Engler, Biophys. J. , 2011, 101 , 470 2629–2637. 471 30 M. Radmacher, in Cell Mechanics , Elsevier, 2007, vol. 83, pp. 347–372. 472 31 A. Buxboim, K. Rajagopal, A. E. X. Brown and D. E. Discher, Journal of physics. Accepted 473 Condensed matter : an Institute of Physics journal , 2010, 22 , 194116. 474 32 D. M. Cohen, H. Chen, R. P. Johnson, B. Choudhury and S. W. Craig, The Journal 475 of biological chemistry , 2005, 280 , 17109–17117. 476 33 A. E. Carpenter, T. R. Jones, M. R. Lamprecht, C. Clarke, I. Kang, O. Friman, D. A. 477 Guertin, J. Chang, R. A. Lindquist, J. Moffat, P. Golland and D. M. Sabatini,

478 Genome Biology 2006 7:10 , 2006, 7, 1. Biology 479 34 T. R. Jones, I. H. Kang, D. B. Wheeler, R. A. Lindquist, A. Papallo, D. M. Sabatini, 480 P. Golland and A. E. Carpenter, BMC Bioinformatics 2008 9:1 , 2008, 9, 1. 481 35 E. Zamir and B. Geiger, J Cell Sci , 2001, 114 , 3583–3590. 482 36 G. von Wichert, G. Jiang, A. Kostic, K. De Vos, J. Sap and M. P. Sheetz, J. Cell 483 Biol. , 2003, 161 , 143–153. 484 37 J. C. Obenauer, L. C. Cantley and M. B. Yaffe, Nucl. Acids Res. , 2003, 31 , 3635– 485 3641. 486 38 M. R. Junttila, S. P. Li and J. Westermarck, FASEB J , 2007, 22 , 954–965.

487 39 J. Li, D. Han and Y.-P. Zhao, Sci. Rep. , 2014, 4. Integrative 488 40 M. Lanniel, E. Huq, S. Allen, L. Buttery, P. M. Williams and M. R. Alexander, Soft 489 Matter , 2011, 7, 6501–6514. 490 41 J. H. Wen, L. G. Vincent, A. Fuhrmann, Y. S. Choi, K. C. Hribar, H. Taylor-Weiner, 491 S. Chen and A. J. Engler, Nat Mater , 2014, 13 , 979–987. 492 42 N. Huebsch, P. R. Arany, A. S. Mao, D. Shvartsman, O. A. Ali, S. A. Bencherif, J.

Integrative Biology Page 22 of 30

493 Rivera-Feliciano and D. J. Mooney, Nat Mater , 2010, 9, 518–526. 494 43 K. Mandai, H. Nakanishi, A. Satoh, K. Takahashi, K. Satoh, H. Nishioka, A. 495 Mizoguchi and Y. Takai, J. Cell Biol. , 1999, 144 , 1001–1017. 496 44 W.-H. Lin, C.-J. Huang, M.-W. Liu, H.-M. Chang, Y.-J. Chen, T.-Y. Tai and L.-M. 497 Chuang, Genomics , 2001, 74 , 12–20. 498 45 H. Yamashita, T. Ichikawa, D. Matsuyama, Y. Kimura, K. Ueda, S. W. Craig, I. 499 Harada and N. Kioka, J Cell Sci , 2014, 127 , 1875–1886. 500 46 I. Vandenbroere, N. Paternotte, J. E. Dumont, C. Erneux and I. Pirson, Biochemical 501 and Biophysical Research Communications, 2003, 300 , 494–500. 502 47 T. U. Consortium, Nucl. Acids Res. , 2014, 43 , gku989–D212. 503 48 A. S. Lebre, L. Jamot, J. Takahashi, N. Spassky, C. Leprince, N. Ravisé, C. Zander, 504 H. Fujigasaki, P. Kussel-Andermann, C. Duyckaerts, J. H. Camonis and A. Brice, 505 Hum. Mol. Genet. , 2001, 10 , 1201–1213. 506 49 S. E. Winograd-Katz, R. Fässler, B. Geiger and K. R. Legate, Nature Reviews 507 Molecular Cell Biology , 2014, 15 , 273–288. 508 50 J. N. Ajeian, E. R. Horton, P. Astudillo, A. Byron, J. A. Askari, A. Millon- 509 Frémillon, D. Knight, S. J. Kimber, M. J. Humphries and J. D. Humphries, Prot. Manuscript 510 Clin. Appl. , 2015, 10 , 51–57. 511 51 E. R. Horton, J. D. Humphries, B. Stutchbury, G. Jacquemet, C. Ballestrem, S. T. 512 Barry and M. J. Humphries, J. Cell Biol. , 2016, 212 , 349–364. 513 52 D. Tosoni and G. Cestra, FEBS Letters , 2009, 583 , 293–300. 514 53 P. C. Bonnette, B. S. Robinson, J. C. Silva, M. P. Stokes, A. D. Brosius, A. 515 Baumann and L. Buckbinder, Journal of Proteomics , 2010, 73 , 1306–1320. 516 54 H. Chen, D. M. Cohen, D. M. Choudhury, N. Kioka and S. W. Craig, J. Cell Biol. , 517 2005, 169 , 459–470. Accepted 518 55 C. Grashoff, B. D. Hoffman, M. D. Brenner, R. Zhou, M. Parsons, M. T. Yang, M. 519 A. McLean, S. G. Sligar, C. S. Chen, T. Ha and M. A. Schwartz, Nature , 2010, 466 , 520 263–266. 521 56 A. Kumar, M. Ouyang, K. Van den Dries, E. J. McGhee, K. Tanaka, M. D. 522 Anderson, A. Groisman, B. T. Goult, K. I. Anderson and M. A. Schwartz, J. Cell

523 Biol. , 2016, 213 , 371–383. Biology 524 57 A. del Rio, R. Perez-Jimenez, R. Liu, P. Roca-Cusachs, J. M. Fernandez and M. P. 525 Sheetz, Science , 2009, 323 , 638–641. 526 58 O. Otto, P. Rosendahl, A. Mietke, S. Golfier, C. Herold, D. Klaue, S. Girardo, S. 527 Pagliara, A. Ekpenyong, A. Jacobi, M. Wobus, N. Töpfner, U. F. Keyser, J. 528 Mansfeld, E. Fischer-Friedrich and J. Guck, Nature Methods , 2015, 12 , 199–202. 529 59 C. P. Johnson, H.-Y. Tang, C. Carag, D. W. Speicher and D. E. Discher, Science 530 (New York, N.Y.) , 2007, 317 , 663–666. 531 60 C. C. Krieger, X. An, H. Y. Tang, N. Mohandas, D. W. Speicher and D. E. Discher,

532 PNAS , 2011, 108 , 8269–8274. Integrative 533

Page 23 of 30 Integrative Biology

534 Figures:

535 Figure 1: ScanSite Results for 47 Different Focal Adhesion Proteins. (A) Each data

536 point represents a predicted binding partner. The y-axis displays the number of times this

537 binding partner was identified during the analysis of the 47 focal adhesion proteins, while

538 the x-axis shows the average accessibility of the binding site. Predicted surface

539 inaccessible binding sites have accessibility values below 1 (gray region). (B) MAPK1

540 inhibitor pyrazolylpyrrole (MAPKi) was applied to cells at the beginning of the 4-day

541 time course on both (A) 11 kPA and (B) 34 kPa substrates and stained for (A) MyoD

542 (white) or Myf5 (gray) and (B) CBFA1 (white barred) or Osterix (gray barred) as Manuscript

543 indicated on day 4. Mean nuclear fluorescence is plotted normalized to untreated cells.

544 **p<0.01 and ***p<0.001 relative to untreated cells stained for the same transcription

545 factor. (C) Schematic of force-induced conformational changes by a “molecular strain

546 sensor” where proteins bound to the sensor stretch the it by transmitting a force across the Accepted

547 protein. The resulting conformational change exposes the once cryptic binding site at an

548 optimal force, F* (middle schematic). Above or below that value results in excessive

549 deformation of the binding site to prevent binding or not enough stretch causing the site Biology

550 to remain cryptic, respectively.

551

552 Figure 2: Confirmation of siRNA-induced Knockdown. (A) Western blots of lysates

553 collected 2 days post siRNA treatment. (B) Immunofluorescence images of proteins Integrative 554 being knocked down. (C) Quantification of mean immunofluorescence intensity from

555 knockdown cells. For Vinculin, p130Cas, SORBS3, SORBS1, Filamin, and Paxillin in

556 (C), n > 10 cells in triplicate.

Integrative Biology Page 24 of 30

557

558 Figure 3: Osteogenic Differentiation and Focal Adhesion Protein Knockdown.

559 Normalized mean intensity levels of (A) CBFA1 and (B) Osterix immunofluorescence

560 staining after four days of culture of osteogenically favorable 42 kPa substrates.

561 Representative images show cell outlines along with (C) CBFA1 and (D) Osterix

562 expression. Filled arrowheads indicate nuclei that maintained transcription factor

563 expression whereas open arrowheads indicate nuclei that lost expression. (E) Heat map

564 indicating fold-change in expression of the indicated osteogenic markers from day 0 wild

565 type cells. For WT, Vinculin, p130Cas, Filamin, SORBS3, Paxillin, SORBS1, and d0 Manuscript

566 WT in (A) and (B), n=298, 35, 28, 44, 29, 28, 20, and 40, respectively.

567

568 Figure 4: Myogenic Differentiation and Focal Adhesion Protein Knockdown.

569 Normalized mean intensity levels of (A) Myf5 and (B) MyoD immunofluorescence Accepted

570 staining after four days of culture of myogenically favorable 15 kPa substrates.

571 Representative images show cell outlines along with (C) Myf5 and (D) MyoD

572 expression. Filled arrowheads indicate nuclei that maintained transcription factor Biology

573 expression whereas open arrowheads indicate nuclei that lost expression. (E) Heat map

574 indicating fold-change in expression of the indicated myogenic markers from day 0 wild

575 type cells. For WT, Vinculin, p130Cas, Filamin, SORBS3, Paxillin, SORBS1, and d0

576 WT in (A) and (B), n=39, 31, 43, 24, 30, 35, 29, and 9, respectively. Integrative 577

578 Figure 5: Molecular validation of Mechanosensitive Protein Interactions. (A)

579 SORBS1 blots of lysates without (top) or with immunoprecipitation (middle and bottom)

Page 25 of 30 Integrative Biology

580 via a MAPK1 antibody. Supernatant and pellet fractions of the immunoprecipitation are

581 shown (middle and bottom, respectively). Prior to lysis, cells were cultured on 34 kPa

582 substrates. (B) qPCR of SORBS1 using primers that target a conserved portion of the

583 (labeled All SORBS1) versus a region only found in the two full length isoforms

584 (labeled L1033). Data is normalized to the GAPDH and then the All SORBS1 condition.

585 Input RNA was collected from hMSCs on 34 kPa substrates for 24 hours. (C) Add back

586 of Full-Length (FL) or mutated Vinculin plasmid (L765I) to Vinculin siRNA-treated cells

587 showing GFP and MyoD expression after 4 days on 11 kPa substrates. Filled and open

588 arrowheads indicate where nuclear localized MyoD expression is or should be. Manuscript Accepted Biology Integrative

Figure 1 Integrative Biology Page 26 of 30

Surface Surface A Inaccessible Accessible 50

40

t MAPK1 n 30 u o

C 20

10

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 B Average Accessibility 1.5 MyoD Myf5 CBFA1 Osterix n o ss i Manuscript e r

p 1.0 x

E *** *** ** 0.5 Normalized

0.0 Accepted Untreated MAPKi Untreated MAPKi Myogenic (11 kPa) Osteogenic (34 kPa) C Exposed, functional binding site Biology

f < F* f = F* f > F* Molecular Strain Sensor MAPK1 Integrative FigurePage 27 of 302 Integrative Biology B WT siRNA WT siRNA A WT siRNA Vinculin Vinculin SORBS1 Filamin

Paxillin Filamin p130Cas p130Cas Manuscript

SORBS1 Paxillin SORBS3 Accepted Vinculin SORBS3 C 1.5 p130Cas *** ** * y

t 1.0 Biology i en s t 0.5

0.0 sc en t I n SORBS1 Filamin Paxillin Integrative

e 1.5 * **** *** uo r l

F 1.0

0.5

0.0 WT KD WT KD WT KD Figure 3 Integrative Biology Page 28 of 30 *** A 1.5 * B * y y t t i i 1.0 en s en s t t

1.0 n I x i r e t s 0.5 0.5 ean O ean CBFA1 I n M M Manuscript 0.0 0.0

T illin T T illin W x W x ilamin a a 0 WT F P P Vinculin d0 W Vinculin Filamin D p130Cas SORBS3 SORBS1 p130Cas SORBS3 SORBS1

C D Accepted Biology

WT Vinculin p130Cas SORBS1 WT Vinculin p130Cas SORBS1 Integrative

Filamin SORBS3 Paxillin Filamin SORBS3 Paxillin

E Osterix CBFA1 1 2 3 Fold Expression from day 0 WT inculin Paxillin Filamin V p130Cas SORBS3 SORBS1 FigurePage 29 of 304 Integrative Biology * ** A 1.5 *** B1.5 *** n n o o ss i ss i e e r r

1.0 p p 1.0 x x E E

5 D My f

0.5 My o 0.5 ean ean M M Manuscript 0.0 0.0 T illin T W x W Vin xillin ilamin a p130 a F P ilamin Vinculin D0 WT F P D0 WT p130Cas SORBS3 SORBS1 SORBS3 SORBS1 C D Accepted Biology WT Vinculin p130Cas SORBS1 WT Vinculin p130Cas SORBS1 Integrative Filamin SORBS3 Paxillin Filamin SORBS3 Paxillin E Myf5 MyoD 2 3 4 Fold Expression from day 0 WT inculin Paxillin Filamin V p130Cas SORBS1 SORBS3 Figure 5 Integrative Biology Page 30 of 30 GFP MyoD A IP: MAPK1 C Lysate B 1.0 Manuscript Vinc FL Accepted

Sup. 0.5 Biology Integrative Blot: SORBS1

Pellet siRNA Vinculin 0.0

All SORBS1 Vinc L765I Normalized Expression L1033