|
{"CAPTION FIG1.png": "'Figure 1: Elastic shell model of the shmoo predicts a spatially inhomogeneous distribution of the lateral cell wall stresses and the Young\u2019s modulus. (a) _M/Ta_ cells synthesize **a**-factor and grow a mating projection towards _M/Ta_ cells upon sensing **a**-factor, and vice versa. (b) Scheme of a shmooing cell divided in base (0), neck (II), shaft (III) and tip (IV) with considered contributing elements, i.e. elastic cell wall (blue) with locally varying Young\u2019s modulus (white hatched), turgor pressure \\\\(\\\\bar{P}\\\\), and material insertion at the tip. (c) Description of coordinates given an axisymmetric geometry: circumferential angle \\\\(\\\\theta\\\\), meridional length \\\\(s\\\\) with corresponding distance to the axis \\\\(r\\\\), relaxed radii for the mating projection \\\\(R_{\\\\text{synch}}\\\\), and the spherical part \\\\(R_{\\\\text{base}}\\\\) as well as cell wall thickness \\\\(d\\\\). (d,e) Distribution of von Mises stress \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\text{M/t}}\\\\) and volumetric strain \\\\(e_{\\\\mu}\\\\), respectively, with red indicating high and blue low values. (f) Resulting spatial distribution of the Young\u2019s modulus \\\\(\\\\bar{E}\\\\), dark green shows low values and shades of light-green to white high values. White area at the tip shows region of undefined \\\\(e_{\\\\mu}\\\\) and \\\\(\\\\bar{E}\\\\). Contour plots of stress, strain and elastic modulus shown in electronic supplementary material, figure S2. We used a cell with relaxed radius of \\\\(R_{\\\\text{base}}=1.9\\\\)\\\\(\\\\mu\\\\)m, expanded radius of \\\\(r_{\\\\text{base}}=2.5\\\\)\\\\(\\\\mu\\\\)m, relaxed radius of \\\\(R_{\\\\text{synch}}=0.4\\\\)\\\\(\\\\mu\\\\)m, cell wall thickness of \\\\(d=115\\\\) nm, turgor pressure of \\\\(\\\\bar{P}=0.2\\\\) MPa and Poisson\u2019s ratio of \\\\(\\\\nu=0.5\\\\). The values of stresses and the Young\u2019s modulus itemized by the base, neck, shaft and tip are shown in electronic supplementary material, table S1.\\n\\n'", "CAPTION FIG2.png": "'Figure 2: **\u03b1**-factor treatment of _MMTA_ bar1\u0394 cells induced a localized softening of the cell wall in the region of the emerging mating projection. (_a,b_) Three-dimensional images with textures representing the elasticity for two individual _MMTA_ bar1\u0394 cells without (_a_) and with (_b_) 1 h treatment with 10 \u03bcM\u03b1\u03b1\u03b1\u03c4\\n\\n'", "CAPTION FIG3.png": "'Figure 3: Dynamics of cell wall elasticity during shinooning, measured by live cell wall nano-indentation experiments and simulations of the dynamic cell wall model (DMI). Softening of the cell wall starts early, continues with elongation of the mating projection and forms a ring around its base. MTA bar\\\\(\\\\Delta\\\\) cells were induced with 10 \\\\(\\\\mu\\\\)M er-factor for 64 min before the first image was acquired. (_a,b_) Sequences of height and elasticity developments during formation of a mating projection, from a continuous AFM measurement (\\\\([d]\\\\) consecutive images of the \\\\(E\\\\)-distribution and \\\\([b]\\\\) three-dimensional reconstruction with elasticity pattern, see electronic supplementary material, movie S1). Arrows indicate a region of non-softened cell wall material at the tip; scale bar, 1 \\\\(\\\\mu\\\\)m. Elasticity pattern controls shape of the evolving shinoo in the dynamic model. (\\\\(e-e\\\\)) Simulation snapshots of DMI (electronic supplementary material, movie S2), showing the pattern of the Young\u2019s modulus (\\\\([c]\\\\), black/green/white), the von Mises stress \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\text{MI}}\\\\) (\\\\([d]\\\\), blue/red) and the volumetric strain \\\\(e_{\\\\text{T}}\\\\) (\\\\([e]\\\\), blue/red); scale bar, 1 \\\\(\\\\mu\\\\)m. Note that colour scale for the elasticity in (\\\\(a\\\\)) ranges from 0 to 10 MPa in order to distinguish the cell from its stiffer surrounding (orange spectrum). Contour plots of stress, strain and elastic modulus are shown in electronic supplementary material, figure S11.\\n\\n'", "CAPTION FIG4.png": "\"Figure 4: The influence of elasticity patterns on cell wall growth for two variants of the dynamic cell wall model, DM1 and DM2. Snapshots of the dynamic cell wall model DM1 (electronic supplementary material, movie S2) and DM2 (electronic supplementary material, movie S3) after 1 h of simulated time, where the shape (column 1), the Young's modulus \\\\(\\\\xi\\\\), the von Mises stress \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\text{WI}}\\\\), the volumetric strain \\\\(e_{\\\\text{V}}\\\\) and expansion rates \\\\(\\\\alpha\\\\) or \\\\(\\\\alpha^{*}\\\\) is shown for different model assumption; scale bar, 2 \\\\(\\\\mu\\\\)m. (\\\\(a\\\\),\\\\(b\\\\)) Simulations of DM1 assuming growth under yield stress. (\\\\(c\\\\),\\\\(d\\\\)) Simulations of DM2 assuming growth under yield strain. (\\\\(e\\\\)) Simulation of pure elastic expansion without cell wall growth. (\\\\(f\\\\)) Spherical reference shape. The elasticity pattern (\\\\(a\\\\),\\\\(c\\\\)) results in a longer mating projection than for homogeneous elasticity (\\\\(b\\\\),\\\\(d\\\\)). The effect of elasticity pattern on cell growth is even larger for DM2 (\\\\(c\\\\)) than for DM1 (\\\\(g\\\\)). Growth showed a ring-like pattern around the tip for the DM2 (\\\\(\\\\xi\\\\)), column 5), whereas for the DM1 ((\\\\(a\\\\)), column 5) growth was focused to the centre of the tip. Contour plots of stress, strain and elastic modulus for DM1 and DM2 are shown in electronic supplementary material, figure S11.\\n\\n\"", "CAPTION FIG5.png": "'Figure 5: Osmotic stress experiments confirmed strain profiles of the dynamic models. (_a_) Modelled shapes under yield stress (left) and yield strain assumption, before (grey) and after (blue) reduction of turgor pressure, respectively. (_b_) Time series of bright-field microscopy images of shmooing MMa bar/\\\\(\\\\Delta\\\\) cells rapidly exposed to high extracellular osmolyte concentration (2 M sorbitol) in a microfluidic device (MFD). (_c_) Scheme of a shmooing cell with indicated dimensions: length of protrusion and longest axis, radii of base, neck and tip. (_d_) Scheme of the MFD set-up. The interface between normal (SD) and high osmolarity (SD + 2 M sorbitol) media can be shifted by varying the input pressures, which allows to rapidly exchange the cellular environment. (_e_,_f_) Measured relative expansion \\\\(\\\\Delta t/t_{0}\\\\) and \\\\(\\\\Delta t/t_{0}\\\\) in black and simulated volumetric strain obtained from yield stress model (DM1) as yellow triangles or from yield strain model (DM2) as blue triangles, for base, neck and tip, respectively. The deformation \\\\(\\\\Delta t/t_{0}\\\\) (_e_) at the neck was significantly higher than at the base or at the tip (_t_-test, ***_p_\\\\(<\\\\) 0.001, \\\\(n\\\\) = 119), whereas longest axis and protrusion show only a slight relative expansion \\\\(\\\\Delta t/t_{0}\\\\) (_f_).\\n\\n'", "CAPTION FIGS1.png": "'\\n\\n**Figure S1. Geometrical considerations and principal in plane stresses and strains.****A** shows the used coordinates: circumferential angle \\\\(\\\\theta\\\\), meridional distance s, radius r and shell thickness d **B** shows principal stresses and strains for a given shell element. **C** circumferential and meridional stresses (\\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\theta}\\\\), \\\\(\\\\sigma_{s}\\\\)) and strains (\\\\(\\\\varepsilon_{\\\\theta}\\\\), \\\\(\\\\varepsilon_{s}\\\\)) are equal for a sphere, while \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\theta}\\\\) is twice as high as \\\\(\\\\sigma_{s}\\\\) for the lateral surface of a cylinder. Additionally, \\\\(\\\\varepsilon_{\\\\theta}\\\\) exceeds \\\\(\\\\varepsilon_{s}\\\\), given that \\\\(v\\\\leq 0.5\\\\).\\n\\n'", "CAPTION FIGS10-1.png": "'\\n\\n**Figure S10. The DM is based on the elasto-plastic deformations of the triangular surface elements.****A** shows the triangular meshed surface of the simulated shmooing cell, concentric rings at the protrusion results from mesh refinement steps during the simulation. **B** In each simulation step the triangles deform according to the applied stresses. [caption continued, next page]'", "CAPTION FIGS10-2.png": "'If the triangle is not in the defined growth zone or \\\\(\\\\sigma_{VM}<\\\\sigma_{y}\\\\), the triangle deforms purely elastically. \\\\(L_{1},L_{2},\\\\ L_{3}\\\\) are the relaxed lengths of the unstressed triangle \\\\(T\\\\) and \\\\(l_{1},l_{2},\\\\ l_{3}\\\\) are the elastically expanded length of the resulting triangle \\\\(T^{\\\\prime}\\\\). Correspondingly, \\\\(\\\\alpha_{1},\\\\alpha_{2},\\\\ \\\\alpha_{3}\\\\) represent the relaxed angles and \\\\(\\\\beta_{1},\\\\beta_{2},\\\\ \\\\beta_{3}\\\\) the angles of the deformed triangle. Additionally, triangles in the defined growth zone deform plastically if \\\\(\\\\sigma_{VM}\\\\geq\\\\sigma_{y}\\\\). Thereby, the relaxed lengths expand to new relaxed lengths, \\\\(L_{1}^{new}\\\\), \\\\(L_{2}^{new}\\\\) and \\\\(L_{3}^{new}\\\\), respectively while the angles remain unaltered.\\n\\n'", "CAPTION FIGS10.png": "'Figure 33. The 50% based on the stable-plastic deformations of the triangular surface elements. A shows the triangular nested surface of the simulated shimming cell, concentric rings at the protrusion results from mesh refinement steps during the simulation. **B** in each simulation step the shrouges deformation according to the applied stresses. **J**ation curves, red-spiel \\\\(f\\\\) The triangle is not the defined growth zone at \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{raw}}<\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\), the triangle follows purely elastically, \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxed lengths of the unstressed triangle and \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxedly expanded length of the moving triangle. **C**errespondingly, \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{raw}},\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\) represent the relaxed angles and \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{f}},\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\), \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\), the angles define scattering angles. **J**ation curves, red-spiel \\\\(f\\\\) The triangle is not the defined growth zone at \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{raw}}<\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\), the triangle follows purely elastically, \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxed lengths of the unstressed triangle and \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxedly expanded length of the moving triangle. **C**errespondingly, \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{raw}},\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\) represent the relaxed angles and \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{f}},\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\), \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\), the angles define scattering angles. **J**ation curves, red-spiel \\\\(f\\\\) The triangle is not the defined growth zone at \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{raw}}<\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\), the triangle follows purely elastically, \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxed lengths of the unstressed triangle and \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxedly expanded length of the moving triangle. **C**errespondingly, \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{raw}},\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\) represent the relaxed angles and \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{f}},\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\), \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\), the angles define scattering angles. **J**ation curves, red-spiel \\\\(f\\\\) The triangle is not the defined growth zone at \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{raw}}<\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\), the triangle follows purely elastically, \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxed lengths of the unstressed triangle and \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxedly expanded length of the moving triangle. **C**errespondingly, \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{raw}},\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\) represent the relaxed angles and \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{f}},\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\), \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\), the angles define scattering angles. **J**ation curves, red-spiel \\\\(f\\\\) The triangle is not the defined growth zone at \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{raw}}<\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\), the triangle follows purely elastically, \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxed lengths of the unstressed triangle and \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxedly expanded length of the moving triangle. **C**errespondingly, \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{raw}},\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\) represent the relaxed angles and \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{f}},\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\), \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\), the angles define scattering angles. **J**ation curves, red-spiel \\\\(f\\\\) The triangle is not the defined growth zone at \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{raw}}<\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\), the triangle follows purely elastically, \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxed lengths of the unstressed triangle and \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxedly expanded length of the moving triangle. **J**ation curves, red-spiel \\\\(f\\\\) The triangle is not the defined growth zone at \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{raw}}<\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\), the triangle follows purely elastically, \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxed lengths of the unstressed triangle and \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxedly expanded length of the moving triangle. **J**ation curves, red-spiel \\\\(f\\\\) The triangle is not the defined growth zone at \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{raw}}<\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\), the triangle follows purely elastically, \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxed lengths of the unstressed triangle and \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxedly expanded length of the moving triangle. **J**ation curves, red-spiel \\\\(f\\\\) The triangle is not the defined growth zone at \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{raw}}<\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\), the triangle follows purely elastically, \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxed lengths of the unstressed triangle and \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxedly expanded length of the moving triangle. **J**ation curves, red-spiel \\\\(f\\\\) The triangle is not the defined growth zone at \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{raw}}<\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\), the triangle follows purely elastically, \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxed lengths of the unstressed triangle and \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxedly expanded length of the moving triangle. **J**ation curves, red-spiel \\\\(f\\\\) The triangle is not the defined growth zone at \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{raw}}<\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\), the triangle follows purely elastically, \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxed lengths of the unstressed triangle and \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxedly expanded length of the moving triangle. **J**ation curves, red-spiel \\\\(f\\\\) The triangle is not the defined growth zone at \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}<\\\\sigma_{\\\\mathrm{y}}\\\\), the triangle follows purely elastically, \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxed lengths of the unstressed triangle and \\\\(L_{1},L_{2}\\\\), in the relaxedly expanded length of the moving triangle.\\n\\n'", "CAPTION FIGS11.png": "\"\\n\\n**Figure S11. Simulated stress, strain and elasticity profiles along the cell contour.****A** The contours of the resulting cell shape of DM1 (yellow) and DM2 (blue) at time 3250 s with indicated regions: base (I), shaft (II), neck (III) and tip (IV). **B, C, D** Contour plots along the arc length \\\\(s\\\\) of the resulting von Mises stress \\\\(\\\\sigma_{VM}\\\\), the resulting volumetric strain \\\\(\\\\varepsilon_{V}\\\\) and the assumed Young's modulus \\\\(E\\\\).\\n\\n\"", "CAPTION FIGS12.png": "'\\n\\n**Figure S12. Sensitivity analysis of the yield limit for DM1 and DM2. A and B show cell shapes obtained from simulations with various limits for yield stress \\\\(\\\\sigma_{Y}\\\\) and yield strain \\\\(\\\\varepsilon_{Y}\\\\), respectively at 1000 s, 1500 s and 2000 s. Lower \\\\(\\\\sigma_{Y}\\\\) or lower \\\\(\\\\varepsilon_{Y}\\\\) result in faster growth. When varying parameters in a certain range, similar shapes are obtained at different times.**'", "CAPTION FIGS13.png": "\"\\n\\n**Figure S13. Decrease in Young's modulus with increasing indentation velocity was negligible within the scope of this study (v=67um/s)**. The mean Young's modulus of a selected 400nm x 400nm region in the center of a trapped cell (left) plotted against the applied indentation velocity (dots with error bars). Linear regression showed a significant but minor decrease in E (slope = -0.0046 +-0.0008 MPa/(um/s), R2=0.85, F(1, 6)=33.93 p=0.001).\\n\\n\"", "CAPTION FIGS2.png": "\"\\n\\n**Figure S2. Stress, strain and elasticity profiles of the SM. A** Contours for the relaxed (dashed line) and expanded (solid line) cell shape. Tip was the origin of the meridional coordinate, indicated with dashed arrow. The regions tip (I), shaft (III), neck (III) and base (IV) are separated by dashed lines for orientation. For the cell shape in **A** profiles of: **B** Young's modulus E, von Mises stress \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\text{VM}}\\\\) and volumetric strain \\\\(\\\\varepsilon_{\\\\text{V}}\\\\), **C** meridional stress \\\\(\\\\sigma_{s}\\\\), circumferential stress \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\emptyset}\\\\) and \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\text{VM}}\\\\), **D** meridional strain \\\\(\\\\varepsilon_{s}\\\\), circumferential strain \\\\(\\\\varepsilon_{\\\\emptyset}\\\\) and \\\\(\\\\varepsilon_{\\\\text{V}}\\\\) are shown. **E, F**\\\\(\\\\varepsilon_{\\\\text{V}}\\\\)- and E-profiles for different relaxed shapes with varying radius \\\\(R_{\\\\text{shaft.}}\\\\) were calculated. **G, H** Profiles of \\\\(\\\\varepsilon_{s}\\\\) and \\\\(\\\\varepsilon_{\\\\emptyset}\\\\) or E and \\\\(\\\\sigma_{\\\\text{VM}}\\\\) assuming a constant volumetric strain \\\\(\\\\varepsilon_{\\\\text{V}}\\\\) and the expanded cell shape in **A**.\\n\\n\"", "CAPTION FIGS3.png": "'\\n\\n**Figure S3. Mapping the cell wall elasticity of entrapped haploid S. cerevisiae cells**. **A** Scheme of the experimental setup: the previously trapped yeast cell is scanned by an AFM in Q\\\\({}^{\\\\rm{ITM}}\\\\) Mode. For each pixel a nano-indentation measurement was carried out. **B** 3D representation of the shape detected in **A**. **C** Hypothetic approach curve for one pixel in **A**, along with a Sneddon fit (green) of these data assuming a conical indenter. The resulting spatial information on the elasticity (0 MPa - 20 MPa) of the probed material was displayed in 2D images **D** or used as a texture for 3D representations **B**. **B** and **D** show the same MAT**a** bar1\\\\(\\\\Delta\\\\) cell with characteristically stiffer bud scar regions (indicated by arrows); scale bar is 1 \\\\(\\\\mu\\\\)m.\\n\\n'", "CAPTION FIGS4.png": "'\\n\\n**Figure S4. Indentation depth varies between stiffer and softer regions.****A** Exemplary force-distance curves of nano-indentation measurements at the marked region in **B** and **C**. **B** shows elasticity map and **C** indentation map of shmooing MATa bar1\\\\(\\\\Delta\\\\) cell shown in Figure 2. If both curves reached similar maximum force, the conical tip of the cantilever indented the cell wall in softer region (shaft, green dots) deeper than the stiffer region (base, orange squares), due to the smaller slope of the curve **B**. The indentation depth \\\\(\\\\delta\\\\) (mean +- Ra, N=900) of a quadratic region (550 nm x 550 nm) at the top of the cell was at the shaft (\\\\(\\\\delta_{\\\\rm shaft}\\\\) = 97 nm +- 26 nm) and at the base (\\\\(\\\\delta_{\\\\rm base}\\\\) = 38nm +- 10 nm) less or equal than 115 nm, which is supposed to be the thickness of the cell wall.\\n\\n'", "CAPTION FIGS5.png": "'\\n\\n**Figure S5. Comparison of height and elasticity patterns between \\\\(\\\\alpha\\\\)-factor treated and non-treated MATa bar\\\\(\\\\Delta\\\\) cells.****A, B** Height images and **E, F** elasticity maps of two non-treated cells and **C, D** height images and **G, H** elasticity maps of two individual MATa bar\\\\(\\\\Delta\\\\) cells treated with 10 \\\\(\\\\mu\\\\)M \\\\(\\\\alpha\\\\)-factor; black and white bars correspond to 1\\\\(\\\\mu\\\\)m. The white arrows represent position length and direction of the selected cross-sections in **I, J, K, L**. Manually selected regions for base (I), shaft (II) and tip (IV) are framed with white rectangles.\\n\\n'", "CAPTION FIGS6.png": "'\\n\\n**Figure S6. The cell wall, at shaft of the mating projection, showed significant lower E-values. A Scatter Dot Plot of the mean E-values of selected regions at the base, shaft and tip, respectively; bar represents the mean. B Mean E-values of selected regions at the shaft, the base and the tip plotted against the mean E-values at the base for each measured cell. Lines correspond to linear regressions forced through (0,0) with a slope of E\\\\({}_{\\\\text{shaft}}\\\\)/E\\\\({}_{\\\\text{base}}\\\\) = 0.28 \\\\(\\\\pm\\\\) 0.06 (Sy.x=0.41, DF 6), E\\\\({}_{\\\\text{Tip}}\\\\)/E\\\\({}_{\\\\text{Base}}\\\\)=0.71 \\\\(\\\\pm\\\\) 0.2 (Sy.x=1.7, DF 6) and E\\\\({}_{\\\\text{Base}}\\\\)/E\\\\({}_{\\\\text{Base}}\\\\)=1.00 \\\\(\\\\pm\\\\) 0.00 (Sy.x=0.00, DF 6). Broken lines correspond to the respective confidence intervals (95%). C Elasticity profiles over tip, shaft and base for all analyzed shmooing cells showed a reduction of E from base to shaft and tip to shaft for every cell.**'", "CAPTION FIGS7.png": "'\\n\\n**Figure S7. Time series replica for estimation of the cell wall dynamics during mating projection formation.****A, B** Time-lapse sequence of the height and elasticity development during the formation of a mating projection, obtained with AFM; from left to right, consecutive images of the E-distribution (top) and 3D reconstruction with elasticity pattern (bottom), from a continuous measurement. MAT**a** bar1\\\\(\\\\Delta\\\\) cells were induced with 12 mM **A** and 10 mM **B** \\\\(\\\\alpha\\\\)-factor for 122 min **A** and 42 min **B**, respectively, before the first image was acquired. White arrows indicate a region of stiffer cell wall material at the tip. Note, the first image of sequence B shows a barely noticeable reduction in E at the side of the emerging protrusion. Both time-laps series show typical AFM-artifacts for high objects (in **A** a doubling of the tip shape and in **B** a height \"shadow\"), indicated with black arrows.\\n\\n'", "CAPTION FIGS8.png": "'\\n\\n**Figure S8. Cell stiffness saturated at 1.5 N/m for high loading forces and large indentations.** The cell stiffness, obtained with indentation experiments of three untreated _bar1_\\\\(\\\\Delta\\\\) cells, was plotted against the loading forces and the corresponding indentation depths. The plotted stiffness k (mean, RMS, N=1024), represents the maximal slope of the indentation curve, using a cantilever with k of 0.64 N/m. The fitted maximum, assuming a Hill function, was used to calculate the turgor pressure applying the formula: \\\\(P=k/\\\\pi r\\\\).\\n\\n'", "CAPTION FIGS9.png": "'\\n\\n**Figure S9. Relaxed shell volume rapidly declines at higher turgor pressure.****A** shows the relaxed radius of the spherical shell with resting radius 2.5 \\\\(\\\\mu\\\\)m, **B** shows the relative volume confined by the relaxed shell, **C** the relative circumferential strain depending on turgor pressure.\\n\\n'", "CAPTION TABS1.png": "'\\n\\n**Table S1 Parameters values used in the models**'"} |
