Mechanics limits ecological diversity and promotes heterogeneity in confined bacterial communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multispecies bacterial populations often inhabit confined and densely packed environments where spatial competition determines the ecological diversity of the community. However, the role of mechanical interactions in shaping the ecology is still poorly understood. Here, we study a model system consisting of two populations of nonmotile Escherichia coli bacteria competing within open, monolayer microchannels. The competitive dynamics is observed to be biphasic: After seeding, either one strain rapidly fixates or both strains orient into spatially stratified, stable communities. We find that mechanical interactions with other cells and local spatial constraints influence the resulting community ecology in unexpected ways, severely limiting the overall diversity of the communities while simultaneously allowing for the establishment of stable, heterogeneous populations of bacteria displaying disparate growth rates. Surprisingly, the populations have a high probability of coexisting even when one strain has a significant growth advantage. A more coccus morphology is shown to provide a selective advantage, but agent-based simulations indicate this is due to hydrodynamic and adhesion effects within the microchannel and not from breaking of the nematic ordering. Our observations are qualitatively reproduced by a simple Pólya urn model, which suggests the generality of our findings for confined population dynamics and highlights the importance of early colonization conditions on the resulting diversity and ecology of bacterial communities. These results provide fundamental insights into the determinants of community diversity in dense confined ecosystems where spatial exclusion is central to competition as in organized biofilms or intestinal crypts.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".