Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42877555›Full record

ArticleISME communications2026

Substrate complexity and species number jointly shift the balance between competition and facilitation in a chitin-degrading bacterial consortium.

Moritz Mohrlok, Lauren Alteio, Julia Berger, Ksenia Guseva, Erika Salas, Monika Schmoll, Dave Sirbu, Christina Kaiser

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ISME communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Moritz MohrlokDepartment for Microbiology and Ecosystem Science, Division of Terrestrial Ecosystem Research, University of Vienna, Centre for Microbiology and Environmental Systems Science, A-1030, Vienna, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0058-8767
Lauren AlteioDepartment for Microbiology and Ecosystem Science, Division of Terrestrial Ecosystem Research, University of Vienna, Centre for Microbiology and Environmental Systems Science, A-1030, Vienna, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9108-5083
Julia BergerDepartment for Microbiology and Ecosystem Science, Division of Terrestrial Ecosystem Research, University of Vienna, Centre for Microbiology and Environmental Systems Science, A-1030, Vienna, Austria.
Ksenia GusevaDepartment for Microbiology and Ecosystem Science, Division of Terrestrial Ecosystem Research, University of Vienna, Centre for Microbiology and Environmental Systems Science, A-1030, Vienna, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5139-7138
Erika SalasDepartment for Microbiology and Ecosystem Science, Division of Terrestrial Ecosystem Research, University of Vienna, Centre for Microbiology and Environmental Systems Science, A-1030, Vienna, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9917-8866
Monika SchmollDepartment for Microbiology and Ecosystem Science, Division of Terrestrial Ecosystem Research, University of Vienna, Centre for Microbiology and Environmental Systems Science, A-1030, Vienna, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3918-0574
Dave SirbuDepartment for Microbiology and Ecosystem Science, Division of Terrestrial Ecosystem Research, University of Vienna, Centre for Microbiology and Environmental Systems Science, A-1030, Vienna, Austria.
Christina KaiserDepartment for Microbiology and Ecosystem Science, Division of Terrestrial Ecosystem Research, University of Vienna, Centre for Microbiology and Environmental Systems Science, A-1030, Vienna, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2005-1820

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biopolymer-degrading microbial communities exhibit complex interactions like division of labor, sharing of public goods, and resource-competition, resulting in intricate social dynamics between their diverse members that shape the functions they perform. How these interactions shift with substrate complexity as species number increases remains largely unresolved, especially as substrate type can fluctuate. Here, we investigated how these factors modulate microbial interactions and community functioning in a synthetic three-species chitin-degrading soil bacterial consortium. All mono-, duo-, and tri-cultures were grown under well-mixed conditions on a labile substrate (N-acetylglucosamine, NAG), a complex polymer (chitin), or a combination of both. We quantified respiration, final biomass, and community structure, chitinase activities, degradation products and cross-feeding responses, and integrated these data with consumer-resource modeling. Substrate complexity altered interaction patterns. On NAG, we frequently observed competitive exclusion; while on chitin less competitive species were still detectable at the end. This suggests a shift from competition toward facilitation. The tri-culture showed significant final biomass increases on NAG, likely related to cross-feeding effects and enhanced polymer degradation and respiration on chitin, indicating multi-species facilitation. Model-experiment discrepancies indicate that competition for primary resources and decomposition product-sharing alone cannot explain the observed community dynamics, suggesting additional metabolic and behavioral interactions. While it remains to be tested whether our findings translate beyond the well-mixed conditions studied here, they show how the balance between positive and negative interactions in this consortium shifts with substrate complexity and species number, shaping community structure and functioning.

Indexed as

chitin degradationcompetitionconsumer-resource modelingcooperationmicrobial interactionssoil bacteriasubstrate complexitysynthetic community

Identifiers

PMID42877555
PMCPMC13662801

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.