Past exam of the zoology course of the University of Cambridge / 2025 / Paper zm6 / 2 / Solution

The hypothesis has two distinct components: the tissue changes its material response, and that change causally affects collective cell migration. A moving tissue may generate different stresses without becoming mechanically different. Conversely, a changed viscosity or yield stress need not generate directed movement without a driving force. The experiment should distinguish force production, material response and geometry.

First obtain a time-resolved three-dimensional map of the embryo using minimally perturbing live-cell imaging. Label nuclei and membranes, register tissue motion, and measure cell speeds, directional persistence, neighbour exchanges, strain rates and the timing of morphogenesis. Track cells relative to their neighbours as well as to the microscope: bulk translation alone does not show internal rearrangement. Compare equivalent developmental stages and anatomical regions, and quantify cell proliferation, death and differentiation so that changes in tissue composition are not mistaken for migration.

Next apply a calibrated mechanical perturbation. An embedded deformable droplet with known interfacial properties can report anisotropic stresses; magnetic actuation can impose a controlled deformation and reveal recovery, viscoelasticity and a possible yield stress. A controlled force step followed by relaxation probes different timescales. Laser ablation of a loaded junction provides a complementary recoil measurement, but recoil velocity depends on both pre-existing tension and dissipation: it is not an absolute tension measurement without a mechanical model. Probe different directions because tissue response may be anisotropic.

An informative precedent combined magnetically actuated droplets and cell tracking in the extending zebrafish body axis. Posterior tissue was more fluid-like than the more mature anterior region. Perturbations of N-cadherin and contractility helped connect adhesion and rearrangements to mechanical integrity and elongation.^[ref] This motivates a specific mechanism to test in the new embryo; it does not establish that all migrating tissues undergo the same transition.

For causality, change the proposed material property locally and acutely, before migration changes. For example, use optogenetics to alter contractility in a defined region, or a reversible adhesion perturbation, with unilluminated and light-only controls. Measure the material response again rather than assuming the manipulation made the tissue stiffer. Then test whether the spatial pattern and timescale of migration change as predicted. Restore the perturbed component or reverse the manipulation to seek rescue. Mosaic interventions help distinguish changes in migrating cells from changes in their surroundings, although altered signal transduction remains a potential confounder.

Finally fit a mechanical model to measured stresses, geometry and material parameters, then predict a held-out perturbation rather than merely fitting the original flow. Replicate across embryos, randomize treatment, analyse trajectories blind to treatment, and use the embryo as the independent biological replicate. Evidence is strongest when a measured material change precedes movement, targeted intervention changes both in the predicted way, and rescue restores both without simply restoring tissue viability.