The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
In Situ Gene Expression in Mixed-Culture Biofilms: Evidence of Metabolic Interactions between Community Members
Open accessAbstract
Microbial communities growing in laboratory-based flow chambers were investigated in order to study compartmentalization of specific gene expression. Among the community members studied, the focus was in particular on Pseudomonas putida and a strain of an Acinetobacter sp., and the genes studied are involved in the biodegradation of toluene and related aromatic compounds. The upper-pathway promoter ( Pu ) and the meta -pathway promoter ( Pm ) from the TOL plasmid were fused independently to the gene coding for the green fluorescent protein (GFP), and expression from these promoters was studied in P. putida , which was a dominant community member. Biofilms were cultured in flow chambers, which in combination with scanning confocal laser microscopy allowed direct monitoring of promoter activity with single-cell spatial resolution. Expression from the Pu promoter was homogeneously induced by benzyl alcohol in both community and pure-culture biofilms, while the Pm promoter was induced in the mixed community but not in a pure-culture biofilm. By sequentially adding community members, induction of Pm was shown to be a consequence of direct metabolic interactions between an Acinetobacter species and P. putida . Furthermore, in fixed biofilm samples organism identity was determined and gene expression was visualized at the same time by combining GFP expression with in situ hybridization with fluorescence-labeled 16S rRNA targeting probes. This combination of techniques is a powerful approach for investigating structure-function relationships in microbial communities.
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
Woese, C. R. (1987) · Microbiological Reviews · doi:10.1128/mr.51.2.221-271.1987 · Cited by 5,042
Cited by
Biofilm formation as microbial development
O'Toole, G., Kaplan, H. B., & Kolter, R. (2000) · Annual Review of Microbiology · doi:10.1146/annurev.micro.54.1.49 · Cited by 3,571
Physiological heterogeneity in biofilms
Stewart, P. S., & Franklin, M. J. (2008) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro1838 · Cited by 2,327
Biofilm formation by Pseudomonas aeruginosa wild type, flagella and type IV pili mutants
Klausen, M., Heydorn, A., Ragas, P., Lambertsen, L., Aaes‐Jørgensen, A., Molin, S., & Tolker‐Nielsen, T. (2003) · Molecular Microbiology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2958.2003.03525.x · Cited by 1,020
Self-citation[6] Genetic approaches to study of biofilms
O'Toole, G. A., Pratt, L. A., Watnick, P. I., Newman, D. K., Weaver, V. B., & Kolter, R. (1999) · Methods in Enzymology · doi:10.1016/s0076-6879(99)10008-9 · Cited by 835
Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for direct visualization of microorganisms
Moter, A., & Göbel, U. B. (2000) · Journal of Microbiological Methods · doi:10.1016/s0167-7012(00)00152-4 · Cited by 787
Metadata
- Authors
- Møller, S., Sternberg, C., Andersen, J. B., Christensen, B. B., Ramos, J. L., Givskov, M., & Molin, S.
- Venue
- Applied and Environmental Microbiology
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 1998-02
- Volume
- 64
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 721-732
- ISSN
- 0099-2240 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-5336
- OpenAlex
- W2098720265
- Cited by
- 322
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 8.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: In Situ Gene Expression in Mixed-Culture Biofilms: Evidence of Metabolic Interactions between Community Members. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aem.64.2.721-732.1998
- The paper
- Møller, S., Sternberg, C., Andersen, J. B., Christensen, B. B., Ramos, J. L., Givskov, M., & Molin, S. (1998). In Situ Gene Expression in Mixed-Culture Biofilms: Evidence of Metabolic Interactions between Community Members. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.64.2.721-732.1998
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.