The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Stable Coexistence of Five Bacterial Strains as a Cellulose-Degrading Community
Open accessAbstract
A cellulose-degrading defined mixed culture (designated SF356) consisting of five bacterial strains ( Clostridium straminisolvens CSK1, Clostridium sp. strain FG4, Pseudoxanthomonas sp. strain M1-3, Brevibacillus sp. strain M1-5, and Bordetella sp. strain M1-6) exhibited both functional and structural stability; namely, no change in cellulose-degrading efficiency was observed, and all members stably coexisted through 20 subcultures. In order to investigate the mechanisms responsible for the observed stability, “knockout communities” in which one of the members was eliminated from SF356 were constructed. The dynamics of the community structure and the cellulose degradation profiles of these mixed cultures were determined in order to evaluate the roles played by each eliminated member in situ and its impact on the other members of the community. Integration of each result gave the following estimates of the bacterial relationships. Synergistic relationships between an anaerobic cellulolytic bacterium ( C. straminisolvens CSK1) and two strains of aerobic bacteria ( Pseudoxanthomonas sp. strain M1-3 and Brevibacillus sp. strain M1-5) were observed; the aerobes introduced anaerobic conditions, and C. straminisolvens CSK1 supplied metabolites (acetate and glucose). In addition, there were negative relationships, such as the inhibition of cellulose degradation by producing excess amounts of acetic acid by Clostridium sp. strain FG4, and growth suppression of Bordetella sp. strain M1-6 by Brevibacillus sp. strain M1-5. The balance of the various types of relationships (both positive and negative) is thus considered to be essential for the stable coexistence of the members of this mixed culture.
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
Cited by
Bioconversion of lignocellulosic biomass: biochemical and molecular perspectives
Kumar, R., Singh, S., & Singh, O. V. (2008) · Journal of Industrial Microbiology & Biotechnology · doi:10.1007/s10295-008-0327-8 · Cited by 1,284
Engineering microbial consortia: a new frontier in synthetic biology
Brenner, K., You, L., & Arnold, F. H. (2008) · Trends in Biotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.tibtech.2008.05.004 · Cited by 1,018
Co-culture systems and technologies: taking synthetic biology to the next level
Goers, L., Freemont, P., & Polizzi, K. M. (2014) · Journal of The Royal Society Interface · doi:10.1098/rsif.2014.0065 · Cited by 630
Biological Pretreatment of Lignocellulosic Biomass for Biofuels and Bioproducts: An Overview
Sharma, H. K., Xu, C., & Qin, W. (2019) · Waste and Biomass Valorization · doi:10.1007/s12649-017-0059-y · Cited by 617
Competitive and cooperative metabolic interactions in bacterial communities
Freilich, S., Zarecki, R., Eilam, O., Segal, E. S., Henry, C. S., Kupiec, M., Gophna, U., Sharan, R., & Ruppin, E. (2011) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms1597 · Cited by 566
Metadata
- Authors
- Kato, S., Haruta, S., Cui, Z. J., Ishii, M., & Igarashi, Y.
- Venue
- Applied and Environmental Microbiology
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 2005-11
- Volume
- 71
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 7099-7106
- ISSN
- 0099-2240 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-5336
- OpenAlex
- W2134225358
- Cited by
- 265
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.58
- 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: Stable Coexistence of Five Bacterial Strains as a Cellulose-Degrading Community. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aem.71.11.7099-7106.2005
- The paper
- Kato, S., Haruta, S., Cui, Z. J., Ishii, M., & Igarashi, Y. (2005). Stable Coexistence of Five Bacterial Strains as a Cellulose-Degrading Community. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.71.11.7099-7106.2005
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.