Phase-Field Modeling of Individual and Collective Cell Migration

Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering volume 28, pages311–344(2021)Cite this article

Abstract

Cell motion is crucial in human health and development. Cells may migrate individually or in highly coordinated groups. Cell motion results from complex intra- and extra-cellular mechanochemical interactions. Computational models have become a powerful tool to shed light on the mechanisms that regulate cell migration. The phase-field method is an emerging modeling technique that permits a simple and direct formulation of the moving cell problem and the interaction between the cell and its environment. This paper intends to be a comprehensive review of phase-field models of individual and collective cell migration. We describe a numerical implementation, based on isogeometric analysis, which successfully deals with the challenges associated with phase-field problems. We present numerical simulations that illustrate the unique capabilities of the phase-field approach for cell migration. In particular, we show 2D and 3D simulations of individual cell migration in confined and fibrous environments that highlight the mechanochemical interplay between the cell and the extracellular environment. We also show 2D simulations of cell co-attraction in non-confluent multicellular systems, in which the use of the phase-field method is crucial to capture the dynamics of the multicellular system.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1

Adapted from [5]

Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Adapted from [71]

Fig. 4

Adapted from [71]

Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Reproduced from [116]. (Color figure online)

Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Notes

  1. 1.

    The lipid molecules possess one end with hydrophilic properties and the other end with hydrophobic properties.

  2. 2.

    ATP hydrolysis is a molecular reaction that produces mechanical energy from chemical energy.

  3. 3.

    Chemokines are signaling proteins secreted by the cells.

  4. 4.

    The derivation of \(j_n\) and \({\mathbf {u}}_n\) is based on constitutive relations and energy dissipation’s principles; see [146, 200] for more details.

  5. 5.

    In a Hele-Shaw cell [160], viscous forces can be approximated by \(-\kappa {\mathbf {u}}\), where \(\kappa\) is a constant.

  6. 6.

    Eqs. (29) and (30) do not have any term that involves non-local computations associated to a single cell, such as, e.g., calculating integrals or distances.

References

  1. 1.

    Akiyama M, Sushida T, Ishida S, Haga H (2017) Mathematical model of collective cell migrations based on cell polarity. Dev Growth Differ 59(5):471–490

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Alaimo F, Praetorius S, Voigt A (2016) A microscopic field theoretical approach for active systems. New J Phys 18(8):083008

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Alaimo F, Voigt A (2018) Microscopic field-theoretical approach for mixtures of active and passive particles. Phys Rev E 98:032605

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Aland S, Hatzikirou H, Lowengrub J, Voigt A (2015) A mechanistic collective cell model for epithelial colony growth and contact inhibition. Biophys J 109(7):1347–1357

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Alberts B, Johnson A, Lewis J, Raff M, Roberts K, Walter P (2007) Molecular biology of the cell. Garland Science, New York

    Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Allen SM, Cahn JW (1979) A microscopic theory for antiphase boundary motion and its application to antiphase domain coarsening. Acta Metall 27(6):1085–1095

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Allena R, Aubry D (2012) Run-and-tumble or look-and-run? A mechanical model to explore the behavior of a migrating amoeboid cell. J Theor Biol 306:15–31

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Allena R, Maini P (2014) Reaction-diffusion finite element model of lateral line primordium migration to explore cell leadership. Bull Math Biol 76(12):3028–3050

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Alonso S, Stange M, Beta C (2018) Modeling random crawling, membrane deformation and intracellular polarity of motile amoeboid cells. PLoS ONE 13(8):e0201977

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Alt S, Ganguly P, Salbreux G (2017) Vertex models: from cell mechanics to tissue morphogenesis. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 372(1720):20150520

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Alt W, Dembo M (1999) Cytoplasm dynamics and cell motion: two-phase flow models. Math Biosci 156(1):207–228

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Anderson DM, McFadden GB, Wheeler AA (1998) Diffuse-interface methods in fluid mechanics. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 30(1):139–165

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Angelini TE, Hannezo E, Trepat X, Marquez M, Fredberg JJ, Weitz DA (2011) Glass-like dynamics of collective cell migration. Proc Nat Acad Sci 108(12):4714–4719

    Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Antonopoulos M, Stamatakos G (2015) In silico neuro-oncology: brownian motion-based mathematical treatment as a potential platform for modeling the infiltration of glioma cells into normal brain tissue. Cancer Inform 14:33–40

    Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Atakhani A, Mohammad-Rafiee F, Gholami A (2019) Influence of cross-linking and retrograde flow on formation and dynamics of lamellipodium. PLoS ONE 14(3):e0213810

    Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Aubry D, Thiam H, Piel M, Allena R (2015) A computational mechanics approach to assess the link between cell morphology and forces during confined migration. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 14(1):143–157

    Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Balay S, Abhyankar S, Adams MF, Brown J, Brune P, Buschelman K, Dalcin L, Dener A, Eijkhout V, Gropp, WD, Karpeyev D, Kaushik D, Knepley MG, May DA, McInnes LC, Mills RT, Munson T, Rupp K, Sanan P, Smith BF, Zampini S, Zhang H, Zhang H (2019) PETSc web page. http://www.mcs.anl.gov/petsc

  18. 18.

    Barnhart E, Lee KC, Allen GM, Theriot JA, Mogilner A (2015) Balance between cell- substrate adhesion and myosin contraction determines the frequency of motility initiation in fish keratocytes. Proc Nat Acad Sci 112(16):5045–5050

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Barnhart EL, Lee KC, Keren K, Mogilner A, Theriot JA (2011) An adhesion-dependent switch between mechanisms that determine motile cell shape. PLoS Biol 9(5):e1001059

    Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Bazilevs Y, Calo VM, Cottrell JA, Evans JA, Hughes T, Lipton S, Scott MA, Sederberg TW (2010) Isogeometric analysis using t-splines. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 199(5):229–263

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Bazilevs Y, Michler C, Calo V, Hughes T (2010) Isogeometric variational multiscale modeling of wall-bounded turbulent flows with weakly enforced boundary conditions on unstretched meshes. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 199(13):780–790

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Bergert M, Chandradoss SD, Desai RA, Paluch E (2012) Cell mechanics control rapid transitions between blebs and lamellipodia during migration. Proc Nat Acad Sci 109(36):14434–14439

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Bi D, Yang X, Marchetti MC, Manning ML (2016) Motility-driven glass and jamming transitions in biological tissues. Phys Rev X 6(2):021011

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Biben T, Kassner K, Misbah C (2005) Phase-field approach to three-dimensional vesicle dynamics. Phys Rev E 72(4):041921

    Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Biben T, Misbah C (2003) Tumbling of vesicles under shear flow within an advected-field approach. Phys Rev E 67(3):031908

    Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Biner SB (2017) Programming phase-field modeling. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Boas SE, Jiang Y, Merks RM, Prokopiou SA, Rens EG (2018) Cellular potts model: applications to vasculogenesis and angiogenesis. In: Louis P-Y, Nardi FR (eds) Probabilistic cellular automata. Springer, New York, pp 279–310

    Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Borau C, Kim T, Bidone T, García-Aznar JM, Kamm RD (2012) Dynamic mechanisms of cell rigidity sensing: insights from a computational model of actomyosin networks. PLoS ONE 7(11):e49174

    Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Bosgraaf L, Van Haastert PJ (2009) Navigation of chemotactic cells by parallel signaling to pseudopod persistence and orientation. PLoS ONE 4(8):e6842

    Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Bosgraaf L, Van Haastert PJ (2009) The ordered extension of pseudopodia by amoeboid cells in the absence of external cues. PLoS ONE 4(4):e5253

    Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Bottino D, Mogilner A, Roberts T, Stewart M, Oster G (2002) How nematode sperm crawl. J Cell Sci 115(2):367–384

    Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Boyer F, Lapuerta C (2006) Study of a three component Cahn–Hilliard flow model. ESAIM Math Model Numer Anal 40(4):653–687

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Bresler Y, Palmieri B, Grant M (2018) Effects of cell elasticity on the migration behavior of a monolayer of motile cells: sharp interface model. arXiv preprint arXiv:1807.07836

  34. 34.

    Bueno J, Bazilevs Y, Juanes R, Gomez H (2017) Droplet motion driven by tensotaxis. Extreme Mech Lett 13:10–16

    Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Cahn JW, Hilliard JE (1958) Free energy of a nonuniform system. I. Interfacial free energy. J Chem Phys 28(2):258–267

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Camley BA, Rappel WJ (2017) Physical models of collective cell motility: from cell to tissue. J Phys D Appl Phys 50(11):113002

    Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Camley BA, Zhang Y, Zhao Y, Li B, Ben-Jacob E, Levine H, Rappel WJ (2014) Polarity mechanisms such as contact inhibition of locomotion regulate persistent rotational motion of mammalian cells on micropatterns. Proc Nat Acad Sci 111(41):14770–14775

    Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Camley BA, Zhao Y, Li B, Levine H, Rappel WJ (2013) Periodic migration in a physical model of cells on micropatterns. Phys Rev Lett 111(15):158102

    Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Camley BA, Zhao Y, Li B, Levine H, Rappel WJ (2017) Crawling and turning in a minimal reaction-diffusion cell motility model: coupling cell shape and biochemistry. Phys Rev E 95(1):012401

    Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Camley BA, Zimmermann J, Levine H, Rappel WJ (2016) Collective signal processing in cluster chemotaxis: roles of adaptation, amplification, and co-attraction in collective guidance. PLoS Comput Biol 12(7):e1005008

    Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Campbell EJ, Bagchi P (2018) A computational model of amoeboid cell motility in the presence of obstacles. Soft Matter 14(28):5741–5763

    Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Cao Y, Karmakar R, Ghabache E, Gutierrez E, Zhao Y, Groisman A, Levine H, Camley BA, Rappel WJ (2019) Cell motility dependence on adhesive wetting. Soft Matter 15:2043–2050

    Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    Cardamone L, Laio A, Torre V, Shahapure R, DeSimone A (2011) Cytoskeletal actin networks in motile cells are critically self-organized systems synchronized by mechanical interactions. Proc Nat Acad Sci 108(34):13978–13983

    Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Carlsson A (2011) Mechanisms of cell propulsion by active stresses. New J Phys 13(7):073009

    Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Casquero H, Bona-Casas C, Gomez H (2017) Nurbs-based numerical proxies for red blood cells and circulating tumor cells in microscale blood flow. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 316:646–667

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  46. 46.

    Chan CE, Odde DJ (2008) Traction dynamics of filopodia on compliant substrates. Science 322(5908):1687–1691

    Google Scholar 

  47. 47.

    Charras G, Paluch E (2008) Blebs lead the way: how to migrate without lamellipodia. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 9(9):730–736

    Google Scholar 

  48. 48.

    Chen LQ (2002) Phase-field models for microstructure evolution. Annu Rev Mater Res 32(1):113–140

    Google Scholar 

  49. 49.

    Choi CK, Vicente-Manzanares M, Zareno J, Whitmore LA, Mogilner A, Horwitz AR (2008) Actin and \(\alpha\)-actinin orchestrate the assembly and maturation of nascent adhesions in a myosin II motor-independent manner. Nat Cell Biol 10(9):1039

    Google Scholar 

  50. 50.

    Chugh P, Clark AG, Smith MB, Cassani DA, Dierkes K, Ragab A, Roux PP, Charras G, Salbreux G, Paluch EK (2017) Actin cortex architecture regulates cell surface tension. Nat Cell Biol 19(6):689–697

    Google Scholar 

  51. 51.

    Chung J, Hulbert G (1993) A time integration algorithm for structural dynamics with improved numerical dissipation: the generalized-\(\alpha\) method. J Appl Mech 60(2):371–375

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  52. 52.

    Cogan N, Guy RD (2010) Multiphase flow models of biogels from crawling cells to bacterial biofilms. HFSP J 4(1):11–25

    Google Scholar 

  53. 53.

    Coleman BD, Noll W (1963) The thermodynamics of elastic materials with heat conduction and viscosity. Arch Ration Mech Anal 13(1):167–178

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  54. 54.

    Cortese B, Palamà IE, D’Amone S, Gigli G (2014) Influence of electrotaxis on cell behaviour. Integr Biol 6(9):817–830

    Google Scholar 

  55. 55.

    Cottrell J, Hughes T, Reali A (2007) Studies of refinement and continuity in isogeometric structural analysis. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 196(41):4160–4183

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  56. 56.

    Dalcin L, Collier N, Vignal P, Crtes A, Calo V (2016) Petiga: a framework for high-performance isogeometric analysis. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 308:151–181

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  57. 57.

    Danuser G, Allard J, Mogilner A (2013) Mathematical modeling of eukaryotic cell migration: insights beyond experiments. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 29:501–528

    Google Scholar 

  58. 58.

    Dawes AT, Edelstein-Keshet L (2007) Phosphoinositides and rho proteins spatially regulate actin polymerization to initiate and maintain directed movement in a one-dimensional model of a motile cell. Biophys J 92(3):744–768

    Google Scholar 

  59. 59.

    Devreotes PN, Bhattacharya S, Edwards M, Iglesias PA, Lampert T, Miao Y (2017) Excitable signal transduction networks in directed cell migration. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 33:19.1–19.23

    Google Scholar 

  60. 60.

    Dreher A, Aranson IS, Kruse K (2014) Spiral actin-polymerization waves can generate amoeboidal cell crawling. New J Phys 16(5):055007

    Google Scholar 

  61. 61.

    van Drongelen R, Pal A, Goodrich CP, Idema T (2015) Collective dynamics of soft active particles. Phys Rev E 91(3):032706

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  62. 62.

    Elliott CM, Stinner B, Venkataraman C (2012) Modelling cell motility and chemotaxis with evolving surface finite elements. J R Soc Interface 9(76):3027–3044

    Google Scholar 

  63. 63.

    Elosegui-Artola A, Oria R, Chen Y, Kosmalska A, Perez-Gonzalez C, Castro N, Zhu C, Trepat X, Roca-Cusachs P (2016) Mechanical regulation of a molecular clutch defines force transmission and transduction in response to matrix rigidity. Nat Cell Biol 18(5):540–566

    Google Scholar 

  64. 64.

    Emmerich H (2003) The diffuse interface approach in materials science: thermodynamic concepts and applications of phase-field models, vol 73. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  65. 65.

    Escribano J, Sunyer R, Sánchez MT, Trepat X, Roca-Cusachs P, García-Aznar JM (2018) A hybrid computational model for collective cell durotaxis. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 17(4):1037–1052

    Google Scholar 

  66. 66.

    Euteneuer U, Schliwa M (1984) Persistent, directional motility of cells and cytoplasmic fragments in the absence of microtubules. Nature 310(5972):58

    Google Scholar 

  67. 67.

    Farhadifar R, Röper JC, Aigouy B, Eaton S, Jülicher F (2007) The influence of cell mechanics, cell–cell interactions, and proliferation on epithelial packing. Curr Biol 17(24):2095–2104

    Google Scholar 

  68. 68.

    Fletcher AG, Osterfield M, Baker RE, Shvartsman SY (2014) Vertex models of epithelial morphogenesis. Biophys J 106(11):2291–2304

    Google Scholar 

  69. 69.

    Fournier MF, Sauser R, Ambrosi D, Meister JJ, Verkhovsky AB (2010) Force transmission in migrating cells. J Cell Biol 188(2):287–297

    Google Scholar 

  70. 70.

    Frieboes HB, Jin F, Chuang YL, Wise SM, Lowengrub JS, Cristini V (2010) Three-dimensional multispecies nonlinear tumor growth-II: tumor invasion and angiogenesis. J Theor Biol 264(4):1254–1278

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  71. 71.

    Friedl P, Wolf K (2003) Tumour-cell invasion and migration: diversity and escape mechanisms. Nat Rev Cancer 3(5):362

    Google Scholar 

  72. 72.

    Friedl P, Wolf K (2009) Plasticity of cell migration: a multiscale tuning model. J Cell Biol 188:11

    Google Scholar 

  73. 73.

    Fuller D, Chen W, Adler M, Groisman A, Levine H, Rappel WJ, Loomis WF (2010) External and internal constraints on eukaryotic chemotaxis. Proc Nat Acad Sci 107(21):9656–9659

    Google Scholar 

  74. 74.

    Gail MH, Boone CW (1970) The locomotion of mouse fibroblasts in tissue culture. Biophys J 10(10):980–993

    Google Scholar 

  75. 75.

    Gamba A, de Candia A, Di Talia S, Coniglio A, Bussolino F, Serini G (2005) Diffusion-limited phase separation in eukaryotic chemotaxis. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 102(47):16927–16932

    Google Scholar 

  76. 76.

    Giomi L, DeSimone A (2014) Spontaneous division and motility in active nematic droplets. Phys Rev Lett 112(14):147802

    Google Scholar 

  77. 77.

    Gomez H, Bures M, Moure A (2019) A review on computational modelling of phase-transition problems. Philos Trans R Soc A 377(2143):20180203

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  78. 78.

    Gómez H, Calo VM, Bazilevs Y, Hughes TJ (2008) Isogeometric analysis of the Cahn–Hilliard phase-field model. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 197(49):4333–4352

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  79. 79.

    Gomez H, van der Zee KG (2018) Computational phase-field modeling. In: Stein E, Borst R, Hughes TJR (eds) Encyclopedia of computational mechanics, 2nd edn. Wiley, pp 1–35

  80. 80.

    González-Valverde I, García-Aznar JM (2018) Mechanical modeling of collective cell migration: an agent-based and continuum material approach. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 337:246–262

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  81. 81.

    Gracheva ME, Othmer HG (2004) A continuum model of motility in ameboid cells. Bull Math Biol 66(1):167–193

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  82. 82.

    Grimm H, Verkhovsky A, Mogilner A, Meister JJ (2003) Analysis of actin dynamics at the leading edge of crawling cells: implications for the shape of keratocyte lamellipodia. Eur Biophys J 32(6):563–577

    Google Scholar 

  83. 83.

    van Haren J, Charafeddine RA, Ettinger A, Wang H, Hahn KM, Wittmann T (2018) Local control of intracellular microtubule dynamics by eb1 photodissociation. Nat Cell Biol 20(3):252

    Google Scholar 

  84. 84.

    Hatzikirou H, Deutsch A (2008) Cellular automata as microscopic models of cell migration in heterogeneous environments. Curr Top Dev Biol 81:401–434

    Google Scholar 

  85. 85.

    Hecht I, Skoge ML, Charest PG, Ben-Jacob E, Firtel RA, Loomis WF, Levine H, Rappel WJ (2011) Activated membrane patches guide chemotactic cell motility. PLoS Comput Biol 7(6):e1002044

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  86. 86.

    Heck T, Smeets B, Vanmaercke S, Bhattacharya P, Odenthal T, Ramon H, Van Oosterwyck H, Van Liedekerke P (2017) Modeling extracellular matrix viscoelasticity using smoothed particle hydrodynamics with improved boundary treatment. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 322:515–540

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  87. 87.

    Holmes WR, Edelstein-Keshet L (2012) A comparison of computational models for eukaryotic cell shape and motility. PLoS Comput Biol 8(12):e1002793

    Google Scholar 

  88. 88.

    Honda H (1983) Geometrical models for cells in tissues. In: Bourne GH, Danielli JF, Jeon KW (eds) International review of cytology. vol 81. Elsevier, pp 191–248

  89. 89.

    Hughes TJ, Cottrell JA, Bazilevs Y (2005) Isogeometric analysis: cad, finite elements, nurbs, exact geometry and mesh refinement. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 194(39):4135–4195

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  90. 90.

    Iglesias PA, Devreotes PN (2008) Navigating through models of chemotaxis. Curr Opin Cell Biol 20(1):35–40

    Google Scholar 

  91. 91.

    Iglesias PA, Devreotes PN (2012) Biased excitable networks: how cells direct motion in response to gradients. Curr Opin Cell Biol 24(2):245–253

    Google Scholar 

  92. 92.

    Insall RH (2010) Understanding eukaryotic chemotaxis: a pseudopod-centred view. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 11(6):453

    Google Scholar 

  93. 93.

    Jansen KE, Whiting CH, Hulbert GM (2000) A generalized-\(\alpha\) method for integrating the filtered navier-stokes equations with a stabilized finite element method. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 190(3):305–319

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  94. 94.

    Jiang J, Garikipati K, Rudraraju S (2019) A diffuse interface framework for modeling the evolution of multi-cell aggregates as a soft packing problem driven by the growth and division of cells. Bull Math Biol 81:1–19

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  95. 95.

    Joanny JF, Prost J (2009) Active gels as a description of the actin-myosin cytoskeleton. HFSP J 3(2):94–104

    Google Scholar 

  96. 96.

    Jurado C, Haserick JR, Lee J (2005) Slipping or gripping? Fluorescent speckle microscopy in fish keratocytes reveals two different mechanisms for generating a retrograde flow of actin. Mol Biol Cell 16(2):507–518

    Google Scholar 

  97. 97.

    Keller EF, Segel LA (1971) Model for chemotaxis. J Theor Biol 30(2):225–234

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  98. 98.

    Keren K, Pincus Z, Allen GM, Barnhart EL, Marriott G, Mogilner A, Theriot JA (2008) Mechanism of shape determination in motile cells. Nature 453(7194):475

    Google Scholar 

  99. 99.

    Kim MC, Whisler J, Silberberg YR, Kamm RD, Asada HH (2015) Cell invasion dynamics into a three dimensional extracellular matrix fibre network. PLoS Comput Biol 11(10):e1004535

    Google Scholar 

  100. 100.

    Kim T (2015) Determinants of contractile forces generated in disorganized actomyosin bundles. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 14(2):345–355

    Google Scholar 

  101. 101.

    Kim T, Hwang W, Kamm R (2009) Computational analysis of a cross-linked actin-like network. Exp Mech 49(1):91–104

    Google Scholar 

  102. 102.

    Kockelkoren J, Levine H, Rappel WJ (2003) Computational approach for modeling intra-and extracellular dynamics. Phys Rev E 68(3):037702

    Google Scholar 

  103. 103.

    Kulawiak DA, Camley BA, Rappel WJ (2016) Modeling contact inhibition of locomotion of colliding cells migrating on micropatterned substrates. PLoS Comput Biol 12(12):1–25

    Google Scholar 

  104. 104.

    Kuusela E, Alt W (2009) Continuum model of cell adhesion and migration. J Math Biol 58(1–2):135

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  105. 105.

    Lämmermann T, Sixt M (2009) Mechanical modes of amoeboid-cell migration. Curr Opin Cell Biol 21(5):636–644

    Google Scholar 

  106. 106.

    Larripa K, Mogilner A (2006) Transport of a 1D viscoelastic actin-myosin strip of gel as a model of a crawling cell. Physica A 372(1):113–123

    Google Scholar 

  107. 107.

    Lee CF, Brangwynne CP, Gharakhani J, Hyman AA, Jülicher F (2013) Spatial organization of the cell cytoplasm by position-dependent phase separation. Phys Rev Lett 111(8):088101

    Google Scholar 

  108. 108.

    Lee Y, Kouvroukoglou S, McIntire LV, Zygourakis K (1995) A cellular automaton model for the proliferation of migrating contact-inhibited cells. Biophys J 69(4):1284–1298

    Google Scholar 

  109. 109.

    Levchenko A, Iglesias PA (2002) Models of eukaryotic gradient sensing: application to chemotaxis of amoebae and neutrophils. Biophys J 82(1):50–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  110. 110.

    Levine H, Kessler DA, Rappel WJ (2006) Directional sensing in eukaryotic chemotaxis: a balanced inactivation model. Proc Nat Acad Sci 103(26):9761–9766

    Google Scholar 

  111. 111.

    Li X, Edwards M, Swaney KF, Singh N, Bhattacharya S, Borleis J, Long Y, Iglesias PA, Chen J, Devreotes PN (2018) Mutually inhibitory RAS-PI(3,4)P2 feedback loops mediate cell migration. Proc Nat Acad Sci 115(39):E9125–E9134

    Google Scholar 

  112. 112.

    Li X, Lowengrub J, Rätz A, Voigt A (2009) Solving PDES in complex geometries: a diffuse domain approach. Commun Math Sci 7(1):81

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  113. 113.

    Lin SZ, Li B, Lan G, Feng XQ (2017) Activation and synchronization of the oscillatory morphodynamics in multicellular monolayer. Proc Nat Acad Sci 114(31):8157–8162

    Google Scholar 

  114. 114.

    Liu WK, Liu Y, Farrell D, Zhang L, Wang XS, Fukui Y, Patankar N, Zhang Y, Bajaj C, Lee J et al (2006) Immersed finite element method and its applications to biological systems. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 195(13):1722–1749

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  115. 115.

    Löber J, Ziebert F, Aranson IS (2014) Modeling crawling cell movement on soft engineered substrates. Soft Matter 10(9):1365–1373

    Google Scholar 

  116. 116.

    Löber J, Ziebert F, Aranson IS (2015) Collisions of deformable cells lead to collective migration. Sci Rep 5:9172

    Google Scholar 

  117. 117.

    Lorenzo G, Scott M, Tew K, Hughes T, Gomez H (2017) Hierarchically refined and coarsened splines for moving interface problems, with particular application to phase-field models of prostate tumor growth. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 319:515–548

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  118. 118.

    MacDonald G, Mackenzie JA, Nolan M, Insall R (2016) A computational method for the coupled solution of reaction-diffusion equations on evolving domains and manifolds: application to a model of cell migration and chemotaxis. J Comput Phys 309:207–226

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  119. 119.

    Mak M, Spill F, Kamm RD, Zaman MH (2016) Single-cell migration in complex microenvironments: mechanics and signaling dynamics. J Biomech Eng 138(2):021004

    Google Scholar 

  120. 120.

    Malet-Engra G, Yu W, Oldani A, Rey-Barroso J, Gov NS, Scita G, Dupré L (2015) Collective cell motility promotes chemotactic prowess and resistance to chemorepulsion. Curr Biol 25(2):242–250

    Google Scholar 

  121. 121.

    Malik-Garbi M, Ierushalmi N, Jansen S, Abu-Shah E, Goode BL, Mogilner A, Keren K (2019) Scaling behaviour in steady-state contracting actomyosin networks. Nat Phys 15:509–516

    Google Scholar 

  122. 122.

    Mallet DG, De Pillis LG (2006) A cellular automata model of tumor-immune system interactions. J Theor Biol 239(3):334–350

    MathSciNet  Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  123. 123.

    Marée AF, Grieneisen VA, Edelstein-Keshet L (2012) How cells integrate complex stimuli: the effect of feedback from phosphoinositides and cell shape on cell polarization and motility. PLoS Comput Biol 8(3):e1002402

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  124. 124.

    Marée AF, Hogeweg P (2001) How amoeboids self-organize into a fruiting body: multicellular coordination in dictyostelium discoideum. Proc Nat Acad Sci 98(7):3879–3883

    Google Scholar 

  125. 125.

    Marth W, Praetorius S, Voigt A (2015) A mechanism for cell motility by active polar gels. J R Soc Interface 12(107):20150161

    Google Scholar 

  126. 126.

    Marth W, Voigt A (2014) Signaling networks and cell motility: a computational approach using a phase field description. J Math Biol 69(1):91–112

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  127. 127.

    Marth W, Voigt A (2016) Collective migration under hydrodynamic interactions: a computational approach. Interface Focus 6(5):20160037

    Google Scholar 

  128. 128.

    Meineke FA, Potten CS, Loeffler M (2001) Cell migration and organization in the intestinal crypt using a lattice-free model. Cell Prolif 34(4):253–266

    Google Scholar 

  129. 129.

    Meinhardt H (1999) Orientation of chemotactic cells and growth cones: models and mechanisms. J Cell Sci 112(17):2867–2874

    Google Scholar 

  130. 130.

    Mizuhara MS, Berlyand L, Aranson IS (2017) Minimal model of directed cell motility on patterned substrates. Phys Rev E 96(5):052408

    Google Scholar 

  131. 131.

    Mogilner A, Manhart A (2018) Intracellular fluid mechanics: coupling cytoplasmic flow with active cytoskeletal gel. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 50:347–370

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  132. 132.

    Mokbel D, Abels H, Aland S (2018) A phase-field model for fluid-structure interaction. J Comput Phys 372:823–840

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  133. 133.

    Molina JJ, Yamamoto R (2019) Modeling the mechanosensitivity of fast-crawling cells on cyclically stretched substrates. Soft Matter 15(4):683–698

    Google Scholar 

  134. 134.

    Mori Y, Jilkine A, Edelstein-Keshet L (2008) Wave-pinning and cell polarity from a bistable reaction-diffusion system. Biophys J 94(9):3684–3697

    Google Scholar 

  135. 135.

    Moure A, Gomez H (2016) Computational model for amoeboid motion: coupling membrane and cytosol dynamics. Phys Rev E 94(4):042423

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  136. 136.

    Moure A, Gomez H (2017) Phase-field model of cellular migration: three-dimensional simulations in fibrous networks. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 320:162–197

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  137. 137.

    Moure A, Gomez H (2018) Three-dimensional simulation of obstacle-mediated chemotaxis. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 17(5):1243–1268

    Google Scholar 

  138. 138.

    Mueller R, Yeomans JM, Doostmohammadi A (2019) Emergence of active nematic behavior in monolayers of isotropic cells. Phys Rev Lett 122(4):048004

    Google Scholar 

  139. 139.

    Najem S, Grant M (2016) Phase-field model for collective cell migration. Phys Rev E 93(5):052405

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  140. 140.

    Nava-Sedeño J, Hatzikirou H, Peruani F, Deutsch A (2017) Extracting cellular automaton rules from physical Langevin equation models for single and collective cell migration. J Math Biol 75(5):1075–1100

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  141. 141.

    Neilson MP, Veltman DM, van Haastert PJ, Webb SD, Mackenzie JA, Insall RH (2011) Chemotaxis: a feedback-based computational model robustly predicts multiple aspects of real cell behaviour. PLoS Biol 9(5):e1000618

    Google Scholar 

  142. 142.

    Nonomura M (2012) Study on multicellular systems using a phase field model. PLoS ONE 7(4):e33501

    Google Scholar 

  143. 143.

    Novak IL, Gao F, Choi YS, Resasco D, Schaff JC, Slepchenko BM (2007) Diffusion on a curved surface coupled to diffusion in the volume: application to cell biology. J Comput Phys 226(2):1271–1290

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  144. 144.

    Oria R, Wiegand T, Escribano J, Elosegui-Artola A, Uriarte JJ, Moreno-Pulido C, Platzman I, Delcanale P, Albertazzi L, Navajas D et al (2017) Force loading explains spatial sensing of ligands by cells. Nature 552(7684):219

    Google Scholar 

  145. 145.

    Otsuji M, Ishihara S, Kaibuchi K, Mochizuki A, Kuroda S et al (2007) A mass conserved reaction-diffusion system captures properties of cell polarity. PLoS Comput Biol 3(6):e108

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  146. 146.

    Palmieri B, Bresler Y, Wirtz D, Grant M (2015) Multiple scale model for cell migration in monolayers: elastic mismatch between cells enhances motility. Sci Rep 5:11745

    Google Scholar 

  147. 147.

    Palsson E, Othmer HG (2000) A model for individual and collective cell movement in dictyostelium discoideum. Proc Nat Acad Sci 97(19):10448–10453

    Google Scholar 

  148. 148.

    Petitjean L, Reffay M, Grasland-Mongrain E, Poujade M, Ladoux B, Buguin A, Silberzan P (2010) Velocity fields in a collectively migrating epithelium. Biophys J 98(9):1790–1800

    Google Scholar 

  149. 149.

    Peyret G, Mueller R, d’Alessandro J, Begnaud S, Marcq P, Mege RM, Yeomans J, Doostmohammadi A, Ladoux B (2018) Sustained oscillations of epithelial cell sheets. bioRxiv 492082

  150. 150.

    Potel MJ, Mackay SA (1979) Preaggregative cell motion in dictyostelium. J Cell Sci 36(1):281–309

    Google Scholar 

  151. 151.

    Poujade M, Grasland-Mongrain E, Hertzog A, Jouanneau J, Chavrier P, Ladoux B, Buguin A, Silberzan P (2007) Collective migration of an epithelial monolayer in response to a model wound. Proc Nat Acad Sci 104(41):15988–15993

    Google Scholar 

  152. 152.

    Provatas N, Elder K (2011) Phase-field methods in materials science and engineering. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  153. 153.

    Rapanan JL, Cooper KE, Leyva KJ, Hull EE (2014) Collective cell migration of primary zebrafish keratocytes. Exp Cell Res 326(1):155–165

    Google Scholar 

  154. 154.

    Reeves C, Winkler B, Ziebert F, Aranson IS (2018) Rotating lamellipodium waves in polarizing cells. Commun Phys 1(1):73

    Google Scholar 

  155. 155.

    Rey R, Garcia-Aznar J (2013) A phenomenological approach to modelling collective cell movement in 2D. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 12(6):1089–1100

    Google Scholar 

  156. 156.

    Ribeiro F, Gómez-Benito M, Folgado J, Fernandes P, García-Aznar J (2017) Computational model of mesenchymal migration in 3D under chemotaxis. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng 20(1):59–74

    Google Scholar 

  157. 157.

    Romanczuk P, Bär M, Ebeling W, Lindner B, Schimansky-Geier L (2012) Active brownian particles. Eur Phys J Spec Top 202(1):1–162

    Google Scholar 

  158. 158.

    Roussos ET, Condeelis JS, Patsialou A (2011) Chemotaxis in cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 11(8):573

    Google Scholar 

  159. 159.

    Rubinstein B, Fournier MF, Jacobson K, Verkhovsky AB, Mogilner A (2009) Actin-myosin viscoelastic flow in the keratocyte lamellipod. Biophys J 97(7):1853–1863

    Google Scholar 

  160. 160.

    Saffman PG, Taylor GI (1958) The penetration of a fluid into a porous medium or hele-shaw cell containing a more viscous liquid. Proc R Soc Lond A 245(1242):312–329

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  161. 161.

    Schillinger D, Dede L, Scott MA, Evans JA, Borden MJ, Rank E, Hughes TJ (2012) An isogeometric design-through-analysis methodology based on adaptive hierarchical refinement of nurbs, immersed boundary methods, and t-spline cad surfaces. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 249:116–150

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  162. 162.

    Schmidt R, Wüchner R, Bletzinger KU (2012) Isogeometric analysis of trimmed nurbs geometries. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 241:93–111

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  163. 163.

    Scianna M, Preziosi L, Wolf K (2013) A cellular potts model simulating cell migration on and in matrix environments. Math Biosci Eng 10(1):235–261

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  164. 164.

    Scott MA, Thomas DC, Evans EJ (2014) Isogeometric spline forests. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 269:222–264

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  165. 165.

    Shao D, Levine H, Rappel WJ (2012) Coupling actin flow, adhesion, and morphology in a computational cell motility model. Proc Nat Acad Sci 109(18):6851–6856

    Google Scholar 

  166. 166.

    Shao D, Rappel WJ, Levine H (2010) Computational model for cell morphodynamics. Phys Rev Lett 105(10):108104

    Google Scholar 

  167. 167.

    Shi C, Huang CH, Devreotes PN, Iglesias PA (2013) Interaction of motility, directional sensing, and polarity modules recreates the behaviors of chemotaxing cells. PLoS Comput Biol 9(7):e1003122

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  168. 168.

    Shields JD, Fleury ME, Yong C, Tomei AA, Randolph GJ, Swartz MA (2007) Autologous chemotaxis as a mechanism of tumor cell homing to lymphatics via interstitial flow and autocrine CCR7 signaling. Cancer Cell 11(6):526–538

    Google Scholar 

  169. 169.

    Shin Y, Brangwynne CP (2017) Liquid phase condensation in cell physiology and disease. Science 357(6357):eaaf4382

    Google Scholar 

  170. 170.

    Song J, Kim D (2010) Three-dimensional chemotaxis model for a crawling neutrophil. Phys Rev E 82(5):051902

    Google Scholar 

  171. 171.

    Song L, Nadkarni SM, Bödeker HU, Beta C, Bae A, Franck C, Rappel WJ, Loomis WF, Bodenschatz E (2006) Dictyostelium discoideum chemotaxis: threshold for directed motion. Eur J Cell Biol 85(9):981–989

    Google Scholar 

  172. 172.

    Strychalski W, Copos CA, Lewis OL, Guy RD (2015) A poroelastic immersed boundary method with applications to cell biology. J Comput Phys 282:77–97

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  173. 173.

    Strychalski W, Guy RD (2012) A computational model of bleb formation. Math Med Biol J IMA 30(2):115–130

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  174. 174.

    Subramanian K, Narang A (2004) A mechanistic model for eukaryotic gradient sensing: spontaneous and induced phosphoinositide polarization. J Theor Biol 231(1):49–67

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  175. 175.

    Sunyer R, Conte V, Escribano J, Elosegui-Artola A, Labernadie A, Valon L, Navajas D, García-Aznar JM, Muñoz JJ, Roca-Cusachs P et al (2016) Collective cell durotaxis emerges from long-range intercellular force transmission. Science 353(6304):1157–1161

    Google Scholar 

  176. 176.

    Swaney KF, Huang CH, Devreotes PN (2010) Eukaryotic chemotaxis: a network of signaling pathways controls motility, directional sensing, and polarity. Annu Rev Biophys 39:265–289

    Google Scholar 

  177. 177.

    Te Boekhorst V, Preziosi L, Friedl P (2016) Plasticity of cell migration in vivo and in silico. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 32:491–526

    Google Scholar 

  178. 178.

    Teigen KE, Li X, Lowengrub J, Wang F, Voigt A (2009) A diffuse-interface approach for modeling transport, diffusion and adsorption/desorption of material quantities on a deformable interface. Commun Math Sci 4(7):1009

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  179. 179.

    Theveneau E, Marchant L, Kuriyama S, Gull M, Moepps B, Parsons M, Mayor R (2010) Collective chemotaxis requires contact-dependent cell polarity. Dev Cell 19(1):39–53

    Google Scholar 

  180. 180.

    Thiery JP (2002) Epithelial-mesenchymal transitions in tumour progression. Nat Rev Cancer 2(6):442

    Google Scholar 

  181. 181.

    Tjhung E, Marenduzzo D, Cates ME (2012) Spontaneous symmetry breaking in active droplets provides a generic route to motility. Proc Nat Acad Sci 109(31):12381–12386

    Google Scholar 

  182. 182.

    Tjhung E, Tiribocchi A, Marenduzzo D, Cates M (2015) A minimal physical model captures the shapes of crawling cells. Nat Commun 6:5420

    Google Scholar 

  183. 183.

    Tozluoglu M, Tournier AL, Jenkins RP, Hooper S, Bates PA, Sahai E (2013) Matrix geometry determines optimal cancer cell migration strategy and modulates response to interventions. Nat Cell Biol 15(7):751

    Google Scholar 

  184. 184.

    Trepat X, Wasserman MR, Angelini TE, Millet E, Weitz DA, Butler JP, Fredberg JJ (2009) Physical forces during collective cell migration. Nat Phys 5(6):426

    Google Scholar 

  185. 185.

    Truesdell C, Noll W (2004) The non-linear field theories of mechanics. In: Truesdell C, Noll W, Antman SS (eds) The non-linear field theories of mechanics. Springer, New York, pp 1–579

    Google Scholar 

  186. 186.

    Valero C, Javierre E, García-Aznar J, Gómez-Benito M (2014) Nonlinear finite element simulations of injuries with free boundaries: application to surgical wounds. Int J Numer Methods Biomed Eng 30(6):616–633

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  187. 187.

    Van Haastert PJ (2010) A stochastic model for chemotaxis based on the ordered extension of pseudopods. Biophys J 99(10):3345–3354

    Google Scholar 

  188. 188.

    Van Haastert PJ, Devreotes PN (2004) Chemotaxis: signalling the way forward. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 5(8):626

    Google Scholar 

  189. 189.

    Van Liedekerke P, Palm M, Jagiella N, Drasdo D (2015) Simulating tissue mechanics with agent-based models: concepts, perspectives and some novel results. Comput Part Mech 2(4):401–444

    Google Scholar 

  190. 190.

    Vedel S, Tay S, Johnston DM, Bruus H, Quake SR (2013) Migration of cells in a social context. Proc Nat Acad Sci 110(1):129–134

    Google Scholar 

  191. 191.

    Vedula SRK, Leong MC, Lai TL, Hersen P, Kabla AJ, Lim CT, Ladoux B (2012) Emerging modes of collective cell migration induced by geometrical constraints. Proc Nat Acad Sci 109(32):12974–12979

    Google Scholar 

  192. 192.

    Vermolen F, Gefen A (2013) A phenomenological model for chemico-mechanically induced cell shape changes during migration and cell–cell contacts. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 20:1–23

    Google Scholar 

  193. 193.

    Vermolen F, Javierre E (2012) A finite-element model for healing of cutaneous wounds combining contraction, angiogenesis and closure. J Math Biol 65(5):967–996

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  194. 194.

    Vicente-Manzanares M, Newell-Litwa K, Bachir AI, Whitmore LA, Horwitz AR (2011) Myosin IIA/IIB restrict adhesive and protrusive signaling to generate front-back polarity in migrating cells. J Cell Biol 193(2):381–396

    Google Scholar 

  195. 195.

    Vuong AV, Giannelli C, Jüttler B, Simeon B (2011) A hierarchical approach to adaptive local refinement in isogeometric analysis. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 200(49–52):3554–3567

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  196. 196.

    Wang X, Du Q (2008) Modelling and simulations of multi-component lipid membranes and open membranes via diffuse interface approaches. J Math Biol 56(3):347–371

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  197. 197.

    Wenzel D, Praetorius S, Voigt A (2019) Topological and geometrical quantities in active cellular structures. J Chem Phys 150(16):164108

    Google Scholar 

  198. 198.

    Whitfield CA, Marenduzzo D, Voituriez R, Hawkins RJ (2014) Active polar fluid flow in finite droplets. Eur Phys J E 37(2):8

    Google Scholar 

  199. 199.

    Winkler B, Aranson IS, Ziebert F (2016) Membrane tension feedback on shape and motility of eukaryotic cells. Physica D 318:26–33

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  200. 200.

    Wise SM, Lowengrub JS, Frieboes HB, Cristini V (2008) Three-dimensional multispecies nonlinear tumor growthi: model and numerical method. J Theor Biol 253(3):524–543

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  201. 201.

    Wu PH, Giri A, Sun SX, Wirtz D (2014) Three-dimensional cell migration does not follow a random walk. Proc Nat Acad Sci 111(11):3949–3954

    Google Scholar 

  202. 202.

    Xi W, Sonam S, Saw TB, Ladoux B, Lim CT (2017) Emergent patterns of collective cell migration under tubular confinement. Nat Commun 8(1):1517

    Google Scholar 

  203. 203.

    Xu J, Vilanova G, Gomez H (2017) Full-scale, three-dimensional simulation of early-stage tumor growth: the onset of malignancy. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 314:126–146

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  204. 204.

    Yang L, Witten TM, Pidaparti RM (2013) A biomechanical model of wound contraction and scar formation. J Theor Biol 332:228–248

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  205. 205.

    Yao M, Goult BT, Klapholz B, Hu X, Toseland CP, Guo Y, Cong P, Sheetz MP, Yan J (2016) The mechanical response of talin. Nat Commun 7:11966

    Google Scholar 

  206. 206.

    Ziebert F, Aranson IS (2013) Effects of adhesion dynamics and substrate compliance on the shape and motility of crawling cells. PLoS ONE 8(5):e64511

    Google Scholar 

  207. 207.

    Ziebert F, Aranson IS (2016) Computational approaches to substrate-based cell motility. npj Comput Mater 2:16019

    Google Scholar 

  208. 208.

    Ziebert F, Swaminathan S, Aranson IS (2011) Model for self-polarization and motility of keratocyte fragments. J R Soc Interface 9(70):1084–1092

    Google Scholar 

  209. 209.

    Zimmermann J, Camley BA, Rappel WJ, Levine H (2016) Contact inhibition of locomotion determines cell–cell and cell-substrate forces in tissues. Proc Nat Acad Sci 113(10):2660–2665

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. School of Mechanical Engineering, Purdue University, 585 Purdue Mall, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA

    Adrian Moure & Hector Gomez

  2. Weldon School of Biomedical Engineering, Purdue University, 206 S Martin Jischke Dr, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA

    Hector Gomez

  3. Purdue University Center for Cancer Research, Purdue University, 201 S University St, West Lafayette, IN, 47906, USA

    Hector Gomez

Authors
  1. Adrian Moure
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hector Gomez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adrian Moure.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moure, A., Gomez, H. Phase-Field Modeling of Individual and Collective Cell Migration. Arch Computat Methods Eng 28, 311–344 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-019-09377-1

Download citation