Three-dimensional biofilm colony growth supports a mutualism involving matrix and nutrient sharing

  1. Heidi A Arjes
  2. Lisa Willis
  3. Haiwen Gui
  4. Yangbo Xiao
  5. Jason Peters
  6. Carol Gross
  7. Kerwyn Casey Huang  Is a corresponding author
  1. Stanford University, United States
  2. University of Michigan, United States
  3. University of Wisconsin, United States
  4. University of California, San Francisco, United States

Abstract

Life in a three-dimensional biofilm is typical for many bacteria, yet little is known about how strains interact in this context. Here, we created essential-gene CRISPRi knockdown libraries in biofilm-forming Bacillus subtilis and measured competitive fitness during colony co-culture with wild type. Partial knockdown of some translation-related genes reduced growth rates and led to out-competition. Media composition led some knockdowns to compete differentially as biofilm versus non-biofilm colonies. Cells depleted for the alanine racemase AlrA died in monoculture but survived in a biofilm-colony co-culture via nutrient sharing. Rescue was enhanced in biofilm-colony co-culture with a matrix-deficient parent, due to a mutualism involving nutrient and matrix sharing. We identified several examples of mutualism involving matrix sharing that occurred in three-dimensional biofilm colonies but not when cultured in two dimensions. Thus, growth in a three-dimensional colony can promote genetic diversity through sharing of secreted factors and may drive evolution of mutualistic behavior.

Data availability

Related scripts and data deposited in Dryad Digital Repository (doi:10.5061/dryad.79cnp5htm). Remaining data generated or analysed during this study is included in the manuscript and supporting files.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Heidi A Arjes

    Department of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Lisa Willis

    Department of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Haiwen Gui

    Department of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0564-940X
  4. Yangbo Xiao

    Cell and Developmental Biology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Jason Peters

    Medical Microbiology and Immunology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Carol Gross

    Department of Cell and Tissue Biology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5595-9732
  7. Kerwyn Casey Huang

    Department of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    For correspondence
    kchuang@stanford.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8043-8138

Funding

Paul G. Allen Foundation (Discovery Center at Stanford on Systems Modeling of Infection)

  • Heidi A Arjes
  • Kerwyn Casey Huang

National Institutes of Health (K22 Award AI137122)

  • Jason Peters

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Copyright

© 2021, Arjes et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 3,368
    views
  • 440
    downloads
  • 14
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Heidi A Arjes
  2. Lisa Willis
  3. Haiwen Gui
  4. Yangbo Xiao
  5. Jason Peters
  6. Carol Gross
  7. Kerwyn Casey Huang
(2021)
Three-dimensional biofilm colony growth supports a mutualism involving matrix and nutrient sharing
eLife 10:e64145.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.64145

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.64145

Further reading

    1. Ecology
    Mathilde Delacoux, Fumihiro Kano
    Research Article

    During collective vigilance, it is commonly assumed that individual animals compromise their feeding time to be vigilant against predators, benefiting the entire group. One notable issue with this assumption concerns the unclear nature of predator ‘detection’, particularly in terms of vision. It remains uncertain how a vigilant individual utilizes its high-acuity vision (such as the fovea) to detect a predator cue and subsequently guide individual and collective escape responses. Using fine-scale motion-capture technologies, we tracked the head and body orientations of pigeons (hence reconstructed their visual fields and foveal projections) foraging in a flock during simulated predator attacks. Pigeons used their fovea to inspect predator cues. Earlier foveation on a predator cue was linked to preceding behaviors related to vigilance and feeding, such as head-up or down positions, head-scanning, and food-pecking. Moreover, earlier foveation predicted earlier evasion flights at both the individual and collective levels. However, we also found that relatively long delay between their foveation and escape responses in individuals obscured the relationship between these two responses. While our results largely support the existing assumptions about vigilance, they also underscore the importance of considering vision and addressing the disparity between detection and escape responses in future research.

    1. Ecology
    Elham Nourani, Louise Faure ... Kamran Safi
    Research Article

    The heterogeneity of the physical environment determines the cost of transport for animals, shaping their energy landscape. Animals respond to this energy landscape by adjusting their distribution and movement to maximize gains and reduce costs. Much of our knowledge about energy landscape dynamics focuses on factors external to the animal, particularly the spatio-temporal variations of the environment. However, an animal’s internal state can significantly impact its ability to perceive and utilize available energy, creating a distinction between the ‘fundamental’ and the ‘realized’ energy landscapes. Here, we show that the realized energy landscape varies along the ontogenetic axis. Locomotor and cognitive capabilities of individuals change over time, especially during the early life stages. We investigate the development of the realized energy landscape in the Central European Alpine population of the golden eagle Aquila chrysaetos, a large predator that requires negotiating the atmospheric environment to achieve energy-efficient soaring flight. We quantified weekly energy landscapes using environmental features for 55 juvenile golden eagles, demonstrating that energetic costs of traversing the landscape decreased with age. Consequently, the potentially flyable area within the Alpine region increased 2170-fold during their first three years of independence. Our work contributes to a predictive understanding of animal movement by presenting ontogeny as a mechanism shaping the realized energy landscape.