ArticleScientific reports2023
Numerical and experimental investigation of multi-species bacterial co-aggregation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Combination of Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus and Weissella confusa treatment improves ligature-induced periodontitis in rats via immune modulation and inhibition of oral pathogens.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- A continuum multi-species bacterial growth model with a novel interaction scheme.Archive of applied mechanics = Ingenieur-Archiv · 2026Article
- Topical Delivery of Autochthonous Lactic Acid Bacteria Using Calcium Alginate Microspheres as a Probiotic Carrier System with Enhanced Therapeutic Potential.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Coaggregation of oral pathogens by postbiotic lactobacilli.Journal of oral microbiology · 2025Article
- A Hamilton principle-based model for diffusion-driven biofilm growth.Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology · 2024Article
- Biofouling on titanium implants: a novel formulation of poloxamer and peroxide forRegenerative biomaterials · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper deals with the mathematical modeling of bacterial co-aggregation and its numerical implementation in a FEM framework. Since the concept of co-aggregation refers to the physical binding between cells of different microbial species, a system composed of two species is considered in the modeling framework. The extension of the model to an arbitrary number of species is straightforward. In addition to two-species (multi-species growth) dynamics, the transport of a nutritional substance and the extent of co-aggregation are introduced into the model as the third and fourth primary variables. A phase-field modeling approach is employed to describe the co-aggregation between the two species. The mathematical model is three-dimensional and fully based on the continuum description of the problem without any need for discrete agents which are the key elements of the individual-based modeling approach. It is shown that the use of a phase-field-based model is equivalent to a particular form of classical diffusion-reaction systems. Unlike the so-called mixture models, the evolution of each component of the multi-species system is captured thanks to the inherent capability of phase-field modeling in treating systems consisting of distinct multi-phases. The details of numerical implementation in a FEM framework are also presented. Indeed, a new multi-field user element is developed and implemented in ANSYS for this multiphysics problem. Predictions of the model are compared with the experimental observations. By that, the versatility and applicability of the model and the numerical tool are well established.
Indexed as
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.