ArticlePLoS computational biology2024
Spatial constraints and stochastic seeding subvert microbial arms race.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neisseria subflava Type 6 Secretion System competition with bacterial and fungal species.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Biofilm vertical growth dynamics are captured by an active fluid framework.Physical biology · 2025Article
- Overcoming toxicity: How nonantagonistic microbes manage to thrive in boom-and-bust environments.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Individual-based modeling unravels spatial and social interactions in bacterial communities.The ISME journal · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Surface attached communities of microbes grow in a wide variety of environments. Often, the size of these microbial community is constrained by their physical surroundings. However, little is known about how size constraints of a colony impact the outcome of microbial competitions. Here, we use individual-based models to simulate contact killing between two bacterial strains with different killing rates in a wide range of community sizes. We found that community size has a substantial impact on outcomes; in fact, in some competitions the identity of the most fit strain differs in large and small environments. Specifically, when at a numerical disadvantage, the strain with the slow killing rate is more successful in smaller environments than in large environments. The improved performance in small spaces comes from finite size effects; stochastic fluctuations in the initial relative abundance of each strain in small environments lead to dramatically different outcomes. However, when the slow killing strain has a numerical advantage, it performs better in large spaces than in small spaces, where stochastic fluctuations now aid the fast killing strain in small communities. Finally, we experimentally validate these results by confining contact killing strains of Vibrio cholerae in transmission electron microscopy grids. The outcomes of these experiments are consistent with our simulations. When rare, the slow killing strain does better in small environments; when common, the slow killing strain does better in large environments. Together, this work demonstrates that finite size effects can substantially modify antagonistic competitions, suggesting that colony size may, at least in part, subvert the microbial arms race.
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.