Short-range interactions govern cellular dynamics in microbial multi-genotype systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Ecosystem processes result from interaction between organisms. When interactions are local, the spatial organization of organisms defines their network of interactions, and thus influences the system’s functioning. This can be especially relevant for microbial systems, which often consist of spatially structured communities of cells connected by a dense interaction network. Here we measured the spatial interaction network between cells in microbial systems and identify the factors that determine it. Combining quantitative single-cell analysis of synthetic bacterial communities with mathematical modeling, we find that cells only interact with other cells in their immediate neighbourhood. This short interaction range impacts the functioning of the whole system by reducing its ability to perform metabolic processes collectively. Our experiments and models demonstrate that the spatial scale of cell-to-cell interaction plays a fundamental role in understanding and controlling natural communities, and in engineering microbial systems for specific purposes. Significance Statement Communities of interacting microbes perform fundamental processes on earth. We do not understand well how these processes emerge from the interactions between individual microbial cells. Our work investigates how strongly individual cells interact and how the strength of the interaction depends on the distance between cells. The discovery that individual cells ‘live in a small world’, i.e. they only interact with a small number of cells around them, changes our understanding of how cells in natural microbial communities are metabolically coupled and how their spatial arrangement determines emergent properties at the community level. Our quantitative single-cell approach allows to address central questions on systems composed of interacting genotypes and to increase our understanding and ability to control microbial communities.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".