The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
High prevalence of biofilm synergy among bacterial soil isolates in cocultures indicates bacterial interspecific cooperation
Open accessAbstract
Biofilms that form on roots, litter and soil particles typically contain multiple bacterial species. Currently, little is known about multispecies biofilm interactions and few studies have been based on environmental isolates. Here, the prevalence of synergistic effects in biofilm formation among seven different soil isolates, cocultured in combinations of four species, was investigated. We observed greater biofilm biomass production in 63% of the four-species culture combinations tested than in biofilm formed by single-species cultures, demonstrating a high prevalence of synergism in multispecies biofilm formation. One four-species consortium, composed of Stenotrophomonas rhizophila, Xanthomonas retroflexus, Microbacterium oxydans and Paenibacillus amylolyticus, exhibited strong synergy in biofilm formation and was selected for further study. Of the four strains, X. retroflexus was the only one capable of forming abundant biofilm in isolation, under the in vitro conditions investigated. In accordance, strain-specific quantitative PCR revealed that X. retroflexus was predominant within the four-species consortium (>97% of total biofilm cell number). Despite low relative abundance of all the remaining strains, all were indispensable for the strong synergistic effect to occur within the four-species biofilm. Moreover, absolute individual strain cell numbers were significantly enhanced when compared with those of single-species biofilms, indicating that all the individual strains benefit from inclusion in the multispecies community. Our results show a high prevalence of synergy in biofilm formation in multispecies consortia isolated from a natural bacterial habitat and suggest that interspecific cooperation occurs.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Bacterial biofilms: from the Natural environment to infectious diseases
Hall-Stoodley, L., Costerton, J. W., & Stoodley, P. (2004) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro821 · Cited by 7,143
The Involvement of Cell-to-Cell Signals in the Development of a Bacterial Biofilm
Davies, D. G., Parsek, M. R., Pearson, J. P., Iglewski, B. H., Costerton, J. W., & Greenberg, E. P. (1998) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.280.5361.295 · Cited by 3,396
Microbial Biofilms: from Ecology to Molecular Genetics
Davey, M. E., & O'toole, G. A. (2000) · Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews · doi:10.1128/mmbr.64.4.847-867.2000 · Cited by 3,086
Ceri, H., Olson, M. E., Stremick, C., Read, R. R., Morck, D., & Buret, A. (1999) · Journal of Clinical Microbiology · doi:10.1128/jcm.37.6.1771-1776.1999 · Cited by 2,155
The Black Queen Hypothesis: Evolution of Dependencies through Adaptive Gene Loss
Morris, J. J., Lenski, R. E., & Zinser, E. R. (2012) · mBio · doi:10.1128/mbio.00036-12 · Cited by 1,208
Sociomicrobiology: the connections between quorum sensing and biofilms
Parsek, M. R., & Greenberg, E. P. (2005) · Trends in Microbiology · doi:10.1016/j.tim.2004.11.007 · Cited by 1,174
What drives bacteria to produce a biofilm?
Jefferson, K. K. (2004) · FEMS Microbiology Letters · doi:10.1016/j.femsle.2004.06.005 · Cited by 1,059
Bacterial coaggregation: an integral process in the development of multi-species biofilms
Rickard, A. H., Gilbert, P., High, N. J., Kolenbrander, P. E., & Handley, P. S. (2003) · Trends in Microbiology · doi:10.1016/s0966-842x(02)00034-3 · Cited by 765
Competition, Not Cooperation, Dominates Interactions among Culturable Microbial Species
Foster, K. R., & Bell, T. (2012) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2012.08.005 · Cited by 741
Studying plasmid horizontal transfer in situ: a critical review
Sørensen, S. J., Bailey, M., Hansen, L. H., Kroer, N., & Wuertz, S. (2005) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro1232 · Cited by 725
Self-citation
Cited by
Biofilms: an emergent form of bacterial life
Flemming, H.-C., Wingender, J., Szewzyk, U., Steinberg, P., Rice, S. A., & Kjelleberg, S. (2016) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro.2016.94 · Cited by 5,979
Life and death in the soil microbiome: how ecological processes influence biogeochemistry
Sokol, N. W., Slessarev, E., Marschmann, G. L., Nicolas, A., Blazewicz, S. J., Brodie, E. L., Firestone, M. K., Foley, M. M., Hestrin, R., Hungate, B. A., et al. (2022) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/s41579-022-00695-z · Cited by 1,179
Tao, C., Li, R., Xiong, W., Shen, Z., Liu, S., Wang, B., Ruan, Y., Geisen, S., Shen, Q., & Kowalchuk, G. A. (2020) · Microbiome · doi:10.1186/s40168-020-00892-z · Cited by 466
Saleem, M., Hu, J., & Jousset, A. (2019) · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110617-062605 · Cited by 437
Consensus guidelines for the identification and treatment of biofilms in chronic nonhealing wounds
Schultz, G., Bjarnsholt, T., James, G. A., Leaper, D. J., McBain, A. J., Malone, M., Stoodley, P., Swanson, T., Tachi, M., Wolcott, R. D., et al. (2017) · Wound Repair and Regeneration · doi:10.1111/wrr.12590 · Cited by 337
Metadata
- Authors
- Ren, D., Madsen, J. S., Sørensen, S. J., & Burmølle, M.
- Venue
- The ISME Journal
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2014-06-17
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 81-89
- ISSN
- 1751-7362 (ISSN-L)
- 1751-7370
- OpenAlex
- W1978500346
- Cited by
- 332
- References
- 36
- FWCI
- 6.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: High prevalence of biofilm synergy among bacterial soil isolates in cocultures indicates bacterial interspecific cooperation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/ismej.2014.96
- The paper
- Ren, D., Madsen, J. S., Sørensen, S. J., & Burmølle, M. (2015). High prevalence of biofilm synergy among bacterial soil isolates in cocultures indicates bacterial interspecific cooperation. The ISME Journal. https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2014.96
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
