Microbial Herd Protection Mediated by Antagonistic Interaction in Polymicrobial Communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the host and natural environments, microbes often exist in complex multispecies communities. The molecular mechanisms through which such communities develop and persist - despite significant antagonistic interactions between species - are not well understood. The type VI secretion system (T6SS) is a lethal weapon commonly employed by Gram-negative bacteria to inhibit neighboring species through delivery of toxic effectors. It is well established that intra-species protection is conferred by immunity proteins that neutralize effector toxicities. By contrast, the mechanisms for interspecies protection are not clear. Here we use two T6SS active antagonistic bacteria, Aeromonas hydrophila (AH) and Vibrio cholerae (VC), to demonstrate that interspecies protection is dependent on effectors. AH and VC do not share conserved immunity genes but could equally co-exist in a mixture. However, mutants lacking the T6SS or effectors were effectively eliminated by the other competing wild type. Time-lapse microscopy analyses show that mutually lethal interactions drive the segregation of mixed species into distinct single-species clusters by eliminating interspersed single cells. Cluster formation provides herd protection by abolishing lethal interaction inside each cluster and restricting it to the boundary. Using an agent-based modeling approach, we simulated the antagonistic interactions of two hypothetical species. The resulting simulations recapitulate our experimental observation. These results provide mechanistic insights for the general role of microbial weapons in determining the structures of complex multispecies communities. IMPORTANCE: Investigating the warfare of microbes allows us to better understand the ecological relationships in complex microbial communities such as the human microbiota. Here we use the T6SS, a deadly bacterial weapon, as a model to demonstrate the importance of lethal interactions in determining community structures and exchange of genetic materials. This simplified model elucidates a mechanism of microbial herd protection by which competing antagonistic species coexist in the same niche despite their diverse mutually destructive activities. Our results also suggest that antagonistic interaction imposes a strong selection that could promote multicellular like social behaviors and contribute to the transition to multicellularity during evolution.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".