Inferring bacterial interspecific interactions from microcolony growth expansion

Le résumé fourni par la source

Abstract Bacterial species interactions significantly shape growth and behavior in communities, determining the emergence of community functions. Typically, these interactions are studied through bulk population measurements, overlooking the role of cell-to-cell variability and spatial context. This study uses real-time surface growth measurements of thousands of sparsely positioned microcolonies to investigate interactions and kinetic variations in monocultures and cocultures of Pseudomonas putida and P. veronii under substrate competition (succinate) or substrate independence (d-mannitol and putrescine). In monoculture, microcolonies exhibited expected substrate-dependent expansion rates, but individual colony sizes were affected by founder cell density, spatial positioning, growth rates, and lag times. In coculture, substrate competition favored P. putida, but unexpectedly, reduced the maximum growth rates of both species. In contrast, 10% of P. veronii microcolonies under competition grew larger than expected, likely due to founder cell phenotypic variation and stochastic spatial positioning. These effects were alleviated under substrate independence. A linear relationship between founder cell ratios and final colony area ratios in local neighborhoods (6.5–65 µm radius) was observed in coculture, with its slope reflecting interaction type and strength. Measured slopes in the P. putida to P. veronii biomass ratio under competition were one-third reduced compared to kinetic predictions using a cell-agent growth model, which exometabolite analysis and simulations suggested may be due to metabolite cross-feeding or inhibitory compound production. This indicates additional factors beyond inherent monoculture growth kinetics driving spatial interactions. Overall, the study demonstrates how microcolony growth experiments offer valuable insights into bacterial interactions, from local to community-level dynamics.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.