Search

Jun 12, 2024

MIcro-societies need a break! (through)

Increasing the politeness and decreasing the brutality of  our interactions with Earth's wild micro-societies populating our  earth, wind and sea is critical as we degrade and destroy  the societies of  their larger bretheren  of our macrosphere

First step is understanding them
Recent advances have revealed that bacteria

*  communicate within their own species AND 
"Listen in’ and ‘broadcast to’ unrelated bacterial species to intercept messages and even coerce cohabitants into behavioural modifications, either for the good of the population or for the benefit of one species over another. 

MICRO-CHEATERS:   Quorum-sensing and Cheating in Bacterial Biofilms
ABSTRACT: The idea from human societies that self-interest can lead to a breakdown of cooperation at the group level is sometimes termed the public goods dilemma. We tested this idea in the bacteria species Pseudomonas aeruginosa, by examining the influence of putative cheats that do not cooperate via cell-to-cell signalling (quorum-sensing, QS). 

Quorum Sensing is not limited to the bacterial kingdom.  The study of two-way  intercellular signalling networks between bacteria (prokaryotes: organisms without  cell nuclei and mitrochondria )  and with both  both single-celled and multicellular eukaryotes (organisms with their chromosomes stashed in each  cell's  nucleus and mitochondria) as well as between eukaryotes is just beginning to unveil a rich diversity of communication pathways. 

(End Intro excerpts). 

We found that:  
 (i) QS cheating occurs in biofilm populations owing to exploitation of QS-regulated public goods; 
 (ii) the thickness and density of biofilms was reduced by the presence of non-cooperative cheats; 
 (iii) population growth was reduced by the presence of cheats, and this reduction was greater in biofilms than in planktonic populations; 
(iv) the susceptibility of biofilms to antibiotics was increased by the presence of cheats; and (v) coercing cooperator cells to increase their level of cooperation decreases the extent to which the presence of cheats reduces population productivity. 

Our results provide clear support that conflict over public goods reduces population fitness in bacterial biofilms, and that this effect is greater than in planktonic populations.


Definitions: (From Wikipedia, whose microbiology contributors sare pretty solid)

Useful research papers

Bacterial conversations have impact on climate Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute


HOW THEY SPEAK    



Definitions: (From Wikipedia, whose microbiology contributers seem pretty solid)

biofilm Environ Microbiol. 2005 Feb;7

Human attitude needs to broaden. As noted above most researchers looking deeply into the society and languages of the microbes are doing so as medical researchers, who identify the species they study as "bad" organisms. They are interested understanding the intricacies of the eukaryotic world's communication  so that they can disrupt it as a means of destroying  microbial communities and preventing future microcommunited from forming

Still what they have learned along the way is important, and it is important for microbiology researchers to  be able  to respond to the concerns of by deep ecologists of the overarching value of the rest of the microbes which are overwhelmingly friendly or oblivious of human beings. and our co-mega flora and fauna.

Micro species. How they defend themselves.
Biofilms and  Eukaryotic cell death programs.    Single celled organism exude a chemical 

Single celled organism exude a chemical that  directs an encroaching  eukaryotic cell's genetic machinery to shut  down. .



 it is not wholly unexpected that Gaia considers switching back planetary biomass to prokaryotes-only, .  

The communities of the one celled organisms with no cell nuclei, mitochondria or other "organelles" complicating their internal structure. Organisms that are capable of living interchangeably as individuals and as temporary multicellular communities. We call them "bacteria" and "archaea" (the latter being a fairly recently-differentiated  seperate one-celled kingdom)

Here are  some basics to set the stage for further considerations.  Links to backgrounders about this interesting society that are accessible to the general reader as well as the  meaning requiring only a general knowledge of the life sciences.  

A note on Kingdom-ism.  

To a carpenter, every problem is a nail, its said,and, with the majority of  those studying microspeech being within the biomedical disease fighting field, bacterial communication is bacterial outbreak needs its communication utterly disrupted, its defenses piercedevery challenge with bacteria  disrupting it and of destroying their communities. 

While comprehensible for the minuscule percent of prokaryotes that are "pathogenic",  it is important to try to limit attacks against quorum sensing to those disease species only, leaving the benign majority of prokaryotes unharmed.  Will that be possible? 

For it is likely that 
(1) The great flush of pharmaceuticals into our  rivers and coastal waters via sewage treatment plants that don't break down these chemicals will send them them in concentrated pulses into the receiving rivers and bays.  and 

(2) Another direction in anti-quorum sensing research is developing means of keeping bacteria from settling on aquaculture nets, ships' hulls,  piers  and other surfaces, thence providing an attractive substrate to settle on for larger organisms like seaweeds, mussels, sponges, barnacles , thus "fouling" the suerface.    How can that be done without  impacting the microcommunities carrying out this necessary function in the nearby coves or downstream places beyond those treated pilings and nets?

Ron Huber
Friends of Penobscot Bay: a Waterkeeper Alliance Affiliate

No comments:

Post a Comment