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

  • 3,521
    views
  • 450
    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
    Laura Fargeot, Camille Poesy ... Blanchet Simon
    Research Article

    Understanding the relationships between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning stands as a cornerstone in ecological research. Extensive evidence now underscores the profound impact of species loss on the stability and dynamics of ecosystem functions. However, it remains unclear whether the loss of genetic diversity within key species yields similar consequences. Here, we delve into the intricate relationship between species diversity, genetic diversity, and ecosystem functions across three trophic levels – primary producers, primary consumers, and secondary consumers – in natural aquatic ecosystems. Our investigation involves estimating species diversity and genome-wide diversity – gauged within three pivotal species – within each trophic level, evaluating seven key ecosystem functions, and analyzing the magnitude of the relationships between biodiversity and ecosystem functions (BEFs). We found that, overall, the absolute effect size of genetic diversity on ecosystem functions mirrors that of species diversity in natural ecosystems. We nonetheless unveil a striking dichotomy: while genetic diversity was positively correlated with various ecosystem functions, species diversity displays a negative correlation with these functions. These intriguing antagonist effects of species and genetic diversity persist across the three trophic levels (underscoring its systemic nature), but were apparent only when BEFs were assessed within trophic levels rather than across them. This study reveals the complexity of predicting the consequences of genetic and species diversity loss under natural conditions, and emphasizes the need for further mechanistic models integrating these two facets of biodiversity.

    1. Ecology
    2. Evolutionary Biology
    Justine Boutry, Océane Rieu ... Fréderic Thomas
    Research Article

    While host phenotypic manipulation by parasites is a widespread phenomenon, whether tumors, which can be likened to parasite entities, can also manipulate their hosts is not known. Theory predicts that this should nevertheless be the case, especially when tumors (neoplasms) are transmissible. We explored this hypothesis in a cnidarian Hydra model system, in which spontaneous tumors can occur in the lab, and lineages in which such neoplastic cells are vertically transmitted (through host budding) have been maintained for over 15 years. Remarkably, the hydras with long-term transmissible tumors show an unexpected increase in the number of their tentacles, allowing for the possibility that these neoplastic cells can manipulate the host. By experimentally transplanting healthy as well as neoplastic tissues derived from both recent and long-term transmissible tumors, we found that only the long-term transmissible tumors were able to trigger the growth of additional tentacles. Also, supernumerary tentacles, by permitting higher foraging efficiency for the host, were associated with an increased budding rate, thereby favoring the vertical transmission of tumors. To our knowledge, this is the first evidence that, like true parasites, transmissible tumors can evolve strategies to manipulate the phenotype of their host.