ArticleBMC research notes2011
Antagonistic interactions between filamentous heterotrophs and the cyanobacterium Nostoc muscorum.
Article in BMC research notes, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Compensatory respiration supports survival during extended heat stress inScience advances · 2026Article
- Muricauda chongwuensis sp. nov., isolated from coastal seawater of China.Archives of microbiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLittle is known about interactions between filamentous heterotrophs and filamentous cyanobacteria. Here, interactions between the filamentous heterotrophic bacteria Fibrella aestuarina (strain BUZ 2) and Fibrisoma limi (BUZ 3) with an axenic strain of the autotrophic filamentous cyanobacterium Nostoc muscorum (SAG 25.82) were studied in mixed cultures under nutrient rich (carbon source present in medium) and poor (carbon source absent in medium) conditions.
findingsF. aestuarina BUZ 2 significantly reduced the cyanobacterial population whereas F. limi BUZ 3 did not. Physical contact between heterotrophs and autotroph was observed and the cyanobacterial cells showed some level of damage and lysis. Therefore, either contact lysis or entrapment with production of extracellular compounds in close vicinity of host cells could be considered as potential modes of action.The supernatants from pure heterotrophic cultures did not have an effect on Nostoc cultures. However, supernatant from mixed cultures of BUZ 2 and Nostoc had a negative effect on cyanobacterial growth, indicating that the lytic compounds were only produced in the presence of Nostoc.The growth and survival of tested heterotrophs was enhanced by the presence of Nostoc or its metabolites, suggesting that the heterotrophs could utilize the autotrophs and its products as a nutrient source. However, the autotroph could withstand and out-compete the heterotrophs under nutrient poor conditions.
conclusionsOur results suggest that the nutrients in cultivation media, which boost or reduce the number of heterotrophs, were the important factor influencing the outcome of the interplay between filamentous heterotrophs and autotrophs. For better understanding of these interactions, additional research is needed. In particular, it is necessary to elucidate the mode of action for lysis by heterotrophs, and the possible defense mechanisms of the autotrophs.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.