Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effect of bacterial chemotaxis on dynamics of microbial competition

  • Published:
Microbial Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although the dynamic behavior of microbial populations in nonmixed systems is a central aspect of many problems in biochemical engineering and microbiology, the factors that govern this behavior are not well understood. In particular, the effects of bacterial chemotaxis (biased migration of cells in the direction of chemical concentration gradients) have been the subject of much speculation but very little quantitative investigation. In this paper, we provide the first theoretical analysis of the effects of bacterial chemotaxis on the dynamics of competition between two microbial populations for a single rate-limiting nutrient in a confined nonmixed system. We use a simple unstructured model for cell growth and death, and the most soundly based current model for cell population migration. Using numerical finite element techniques, we examine both transient and steady-state behavior of the competing populations, focusing primarily on the influence of the cell random motility coefficient,μ, and the cell chemotaxis coefficient, χ. We find that, in general, there are four possible steady-state outcomes: both populations die out, population 1 exists alone, population 2 exists alone, and the two populations coexist. We find that, in contrast to well-mixed systems, the slower-growing population can coexist and even exist alone if it possesses sufficiently superior motility and chemotaxis properties. Our results allow estimation of the value of χ necessary to allow coexistence and predominance for reasonable values of growth and random motility parameters in common systems. An especially intriguing finding is that there is a minimum value of χ necessary for a chemotactic population to have a competitive advantage over an immotile population in a confined nonmixed system. Further, for typical system parameter values, this minimum value of χ is the range of values that can be estimated from independent experimental assays for chemotaxis.

Thus, in typical nonmixed systems, cell motility and chemotaxis properties can be the determining factors in governing population dynamics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alt W (1980) Biased random walk models for chemotaxis and relted diffusion approximations. J Math Biol 9:147

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Berg H (1983) Random walks in biology. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  3. Boyce JR, Miller RV (1982) Motility as a selective force in the reversion of cystic fibrosis-associated mucoidPseudomonas aeruginosa to the nonmucoid phenotype in culture. Infect Immun 37:840

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Boyd A, Simon M (1982) Bacterial chemotaxis. Ann Rev Physiol 44:501

    Google Scholar 

  5. Freter R, O'Brien PCM, Halstead SA (1978) Adhesion and chemotaxis as determinants of bacterial association with mucosal surfaces. Adv Exp Biol Med 107:4292

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hazelbauer GL, Harayama S (1983) Sensory transudction in bacterial chemotaxis. Int Rev Cytol 81:33

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Holz M, Chen SH (1979) Spatio-temporal structure of migrating chemotactic bands ofEscherichia coli. Biophys J 26:243

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Karel S, Libick S, Robertson CR (1985) The immobilization of whole cells: engineering principles. Chem Eng Sci 40:1321

    Google Scholar 

  9. Keller EF (1974) Mathematical aspects of bacterial chemotaxis. In: Sorkin E (ed) Chemotaxis: its biology and biochemistry. S. Karger, Basel, p 79

    Google Scholar 

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

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kelman A, Hruschka J (1973) The role of motility and aerotaxis in the selective increase of a virulent bacteria in still broth cultures ofPseudomonas solanacearum. J Gen Microbiol 76:177

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Koshland DE Jr (1980) Bacterial chemotaxis as a model behavioral system. Raven Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  13. Koshland DE Jr (1981) Biochemistry of sensing and adaptation in a simple bacterial system. Ann Rev Biochem 50:765

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lapidus IR, Schiller R (1978) A model for traveling bands of chemotactic bacteria. Biophys J 22:1

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lauffenburger DA, Aris R, Keller KH (1981) Effects of random motility on growth of bacterial populations. Microb Ecol 7:207

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lauffenburger DA, Aris R, Keller KH (1982) Effects of cell motility and chemotaxis on microbial population growth. Biophys J 40:209

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lauffenburger DA, Calcagno B (1983) Competition between microbial populations in a non-mixed environment: effect of cell random motility. Biotech Bioeng 25:2103

    Google Scholar 

  18. Lauffenburger DA, Kennedy CR, Aris R (1984) Traveling bands of chemotactic bacteria in the context of population growth. Bull Math Biol 46:19

    Google Scholar 

  19. Macnab RM (1978) Bacterial motility and chemotaxis: the molecular biology of a behavioral system. CRC Crit Rev Biochem 5:291

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Mesibov R, Ordal GW, Adler J (1973) The range of attractant concentrations for bacterial chemotaxis and the threshold and size of reponse over this range. J Gen Physiol 62:203

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Old DC, Duguid JP (1970) Selective outgrowth of fimbriate bacteria in static liquid medium. J Bacteriol 103:447

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Pilgrim WR, Williams FD (1976) Survival value of chemotaxis in mixed cultures. Can J Microbiol 22:1771

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Rivero M, Lauffenburger DA (1986) Analysis of the capillary assay for determination of Bacterial motility and chemotaxis parameters. Biotech Bioeng 28:1178

    Google Scholar 

  24. Rosen G (1978) Steady-state distribution of bacteria chemotactic toward oxygen. Bull Math Biol 40:671

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Segel LA (1977) A theoretical study of receptor mechanisms in bacterial chemotaxis. SIAM J Appl Math 32:653

    Google Scholar 

  26. Segel LA, Jackson JL (1973) Theoretical analysis of chemotactic movement in bacteria. J Mechanochem Cell Motil 2:25

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Segel LA, Chet I, Henis Y (1977) A simple quantitative assay for bacterial motility. J Gen Microbiol 98:329

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Smith JL, Doetsch RN (1969) Studies on negative chemotaxis and the survial value of motility inPseudomonas fluorescens. J Gen Microbiol 55:379

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Strang G, Fix GJ (1973) An analysis of the finite element method. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Pennsylvania, 19104, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA

    Francis X. Kelly, Karen J. Dapsis & Douglas A. Lauffenburger

Authors
  1. Francis X. Kelly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Karen J. Dapsis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Douglas A. Lauffenburger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kelly, F.X., Dapsis, K.J. & Lauffenburger, D.A. Effect of bacterial chemotaxis on dynamics of microbial competition. Microb Ecol 16, 115–131 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02018908

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02018908

Keywords

Search

Navigation