Limits...
Biophysical controls on cluster dynamics and architectural differentiation of microbial biofilms in contrasting flow environments.

Hödl I, Mari L, Bertuzzo E, Suweis S, Besemer K, Rinaldo A, Battin TJ - Environ. Microbiol. (2013)

Bottom Line: By experimenting with complex microbial communities forming biofilms in contrasting hydrodynamic microenvironments in stream mesocosms, we show that morphogenesis results in 'ripple-like' and 'star-like' architectures--as they have also been reported from monospecies bacterial biofilms, for instance.To explore the potential contribution of demographic processes to these architectures, we propose a size-structured population model to simulate the dynamics of biofilm growth and cluster size distribution.Our findings establish that basic physical and demographic processes are key forces that shape apparently universal biofilm architectures as they occur in diverse microbial but also in single-species bacterial biofilms.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Limnology and Oceanography, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Vienna, 1090, Vienna, Austria.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Results of model parameter variation. The analysis was performed for biofilms at the transition from isotropic to anisotropic growth (day 6) and for matured biofilms (day 13). Variations of biofilm coverage at day 6 (A) and at day 13 (B), and for cluster abundance at day 6 (C) and at day 13 (D) at the crest. (E to H) same as (A to D) but in the trough. In each plot the effects of positive variations (+20%) from the reference parameter sets (Table 1 in the main text) are reported in blue, while negative variations (-20%) are reported in red. Note that the parameters are sorted in descending order of their overall impact. d is the deposition rate, f0 is the reproduction rate, m is the fraction of cells migrating over a short range, and b0 is the coalescence rate.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4231231&req=5

fig05: Results of model parameter variation. The analysis was performed for biofilms at the transition from isotropic to anisotropic growth (day 6) and for matured biofilms (day 13). Variations of biofilm coverage at day 6 (A) and at day 13 (B), and for cluster abundance at day 6 (C) and at day 13 (D) at the crest. (E to H) same as (A to D) but in the trough. In each plot the effects of positive variations (+20%) from the reference parameter sets (Table 1 in the main text) are reported in blue, while negative variations (-20%) are reported in red. Note that the parameters are sorted in descending order of their overall impact. d is the deposition rate, f0 is the reproduction rate, m is the fraction of cells migrating over a short range, and b0 is the coalescence rate.

Mentions: To disentangle the impact of parameter variation on the dynamics of biofilm coverage and cluster abundance, we run a sensitivity analysis varying the model parameters and evaluating the resulting effects at the transition from isotropic to anisotropic clusters at day 6 and for a later stage at day 13 (Fig. 5 and Supporting Information). Variations of parameters generally support our experimental observations and notion of biofilm morphogenesis. For instance, during the transition phase, deposition rate and, to some extent, also reproduction rate were most influential on coverage and cluster abundance both at the crest and in the trough. As expected, coalescence and the fraction of migration cells were rather negligible for coverage in both microenvironments.


Biophysical controls on cluster dynamics and architectural differentiation of microbial biofilms in contrasting flow environments.

Hödl I, Mari L, Bertuzzo E, Suweis S, Besemer K, Rinaldo A, Battin TJ - Environ. Microbiol. (2013)

Results of model parameter variation. The analysis was performed for biofilms at the transition from isotropic to anisotropic growth (day 6) and for matured biofilms (day 13). Variations of biofilm coverage at day 6 (A) and at day 13 (B), and for cluster abundance at day 6 (C) and at day 13 (D) at the crest. (E to H) same as (A to D) but in the trough. In each plot the effects of positive variations (+20%) from the reference parameter sets (Table 1 in the main text) are reported in blue, while negative variations (-20%) are reported in red. Note that the parameters are sorted in descending order of their overall impact. d is the deposition rate, f0 is the reproduction rate, m is the fraction of cells migrating over a short range, and b0 is the coalescence rate.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4231231&req=5

fig05: Results of model parameter variation. The analysis was performed for biofilms at the transition from isotropic to anisotropic growth (day 6) and for matured biofilms (day 13). Variations of biofilm coverage at day 6 (A) and at day 13 (B), and for cluster abundance at day 6 (C) and at day 13 (D) at the crest. (E to H) same as (A to D) but in the trough. In each plot the effects of positive variations (+20%) from the reference parameter sets (Table 1 in the main text) are reported in blue, while negative variations (-20%) are reported in red. Note that the parameters are sorted in descending order of their overall impact. d is the deposition rate, f0 is the reproduction rate, m is the fraction of cells migrating over a short range, and b0 is the coalescence rate.
Mentions: To disentangle the impact of parameter variation on the dynamics of biofilm coverage and cluster abundance, we run a sensitivity analysis varying the model parameters and evaluating the resulting effects at the transition from isotropic to anisotropic clusters at day 6 and for a later stage at day 13 (Fig. 5 and Supporting Information). Variations of parameters generally support our experimental observations and notion of biofilm morphogenesis. For instance, during the transition phase, deposition rate and, to some extent, also reproduction rate were most influential on coverage and cluster abundance both at the crest and in the trough. As expected, coalescence and the fraction of migration cells were rather negligible for coverage in both microenvironments.

Bottom Line: By experimenting with complex microbial communities forming biofilms in contrasting hydrodynamic microenvironments in stream mesocosms, we show that morphogenesis results in 'ripple-like' and 'star-like' architectures--as they have also been reported from monospecies bacterial biofilms, for instance.To explore the potential contribution of demographic processes to these architectures, we propose a size-structured population model to simulate the dynamics of biofilm growth and cluster size distribution.Our findings establish that basic physical and demographic processes are key forces that shape apparently universal biofilm architectures as they occur in diverse microbial but also in single-species bacterial biofilms.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Limnology and Oceanography, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Vienna, 1090, Vienna, Austria.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus