4.8 Article

Ecology of microbial invasions: Amplification allows virus carriers to invade more rapidly when rare

Journal

CURRENT BIOLOGY
Volume 16, Issue 20, Pages 2048-2052

Publisher

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2006.08.089

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Wellcome Trust Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

that for plausible parameters, the release of chemical toxins is superior as a resident strategy to repel invasions, whereas the release of temperate phage is superior as a strategy of invasion. Locally adapted residents present a formidable barrier to invasion [1-3]. One solution for invaders is to kill residents [4]. Here, we explore the comparative ecological dynamics of two distinct microbial mechanisms of killing competitors, via the release of chemicals (e.g., bacteriocins [5]) and via the release of parasites (e.g., temperate phage [6, 7]). We compared the short-term population dynamics of susceptible E. coli K12 and isogenic carriers of phage phi 80 in experimental cultures to that anticipated by mathematical models using independently derived experimental parameters. Whereas phages are a direct burden to their carriers because of probabilistic host lysis, by killing competitor bacteria they can indirectly benefit bacterial kin made immune by carrying isogenic phage. This is similar to previously described bacteriocin-mediated effects. However, unlike chemical killing, viable phage trigger an epidemic among susceptible competitors, which become factories producing more phage. Amplification makes phage carriers able to invade well-mixed susceptibles even faster when rare, whereas chemical killers can only win in a well-mixed environment when sufficiently abundant. We demonstrate that for plausible parameters, the release of chemical toxins is superior as a resident strategy to repel invasions, whereas the release of temperate phage is superior as a strategy of invasion.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available