4.0 Article

Diversity of bet-hedging strategies in microbial communities-Recent cases and insights

期刊

WIRES MECHANISMS OF DISEASE
卷 14, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/wsbm.1544

关键词

adaptation; bet-hedging; evolutionary strategy; persisters; phenotypic heterogeneity

资金

  1. BE-Basic RD Program
  2. Christian Hansen company, Denmark
  3. Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) [13858]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Microbial communities are constantly exposed to unpredictable changes in their environment, leading microorganisms to develop the ability to switch phenotypes quickly. Bet-hedging is a strategy in which populations diversify their phenotypes randomly to spread risks, allowing them to persist in dynamic habitats. However, this strategy may come with a fitness cost in specific environments.
Microbial communities are continuously exposed to unpredictable changes in their environment. To thrive in such dynamic habitats, microorganisms have developed the ability to readily switch phenotypes, resulting in a number of differently adapted subpopulations expressing various traits. In evolutionary biology, a particular case of phenotypic heterogeneity that evolved in an unpredictably changing environment has been defined as bet-hedging. Bet-hedging is a risk-spreading strategy where isogenic populations stochastically (randomly) diversify their phenotypes, often resulting in maladapted individuals that suffer lower reproductive success. This fitness trade-off in a specific environment may have a selective advantage upon the sudden environmental shift. Thus, a bet-hedging strategy allows populations to persist in very dynamic habitats, but with a particular fitness cost. In recent years, numerous examples of phenotypic heterogeneity in different microorganisms have been observed, some suggesting bet-hedging. Here, we highlight the latest reports concerning bet-hedging phenomena in various microorganisms to show how versatile this strategy is within the microbial realms.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据