Microbial Ecology seminars

A major unresolved question in microbiome research is whether the complex ecological patterns observed in surveys of natural communities can be explained and predicted by fundamental, quantitative principles. Bridging theory and experiment is hampered by the multiplicity of ecological processes that simultaneously affect community assembly and a lack of theoretical tools for modeling diverse ecosystems. Here, I will present a simple ecological model of microbial communities that reproduces large-scale ecological patterns observed across multiple natural and experimental settings including compositional gradients, clustering by environment, diversity/harshness correlations, and nestedness. Surprisingly, our model works despite having a “random metabolisms” and “random consumer preferences”. This raises the natural of question of why random ecosystems can describe real-world experimental data. In the second, more theoretical part of the talk, I will answer this question by showing that when a community becomes diverse enough, it will always self-organize into a stable state whose properties are well captured by a “typical random ecosystems”.

Biological systems can self-organize in complex structures, able to evolve and adapt to widely varying environmental conditions. Despite the importance of fluid flow for transporting and organizing populations, few laboratory systems exist to systematically investigate the impact of advection on their spatial evolutionary dynamics. In this talk, I will discuss how we can address this problem by studying the morphology and genetic spatial structure of microbial colonies growing on the surface of a viscous substrate. When grown on a liquid, I will show that S. cerevisiae (baker’s yeast) can behave like “active matter” and collectively generate a fluid flow many times larger than the unperturbed colony expansion speed, which in turn produces mechanical stresses and fragmentation of the initial colony. Combining laboratory experiments with numerical modeling, I will demonstrate that the coupling between metabolic activity and hydrodynamic flows can produce positive feedbacks and drive preferential growth phenomena leading to the formation of microbial jets. Our work provides rich opportunities to explore the interplay between hydrodynamics, growth and competition within a versatile system.

It is sometimes said that there are two reasons why physics is so successful as a science. One is that it deals with very simple problems. The other is that it attempts to account only for universal aspects of systems at a desired level of description, with lower level phenomena subsumed into a small number of adjustable parameters. It is a widespread belief that this approach seems unlikely to be useful in biology, which is intimidatingly complex, where “everything has an exception”, and where there are a huge number of undetermined parameters. I will try to argue, nonetheless, that there are important, experimentally-testable aspects of biology that exhibit universality, and should be amenable to being tackled from a physics perspective. My suggestion is that this can lead to useful new insights into the existence and universal characteristics of living systems. I will try to justify this point of view by contrasting the goals and practices of the field of condensed matter physics with materials science, and then by extension, the goals and practices of the newly emerging field of “Physics of Living Systems” with biology. Specific biological examples that I will discuss include the following: Universal patterns of gene expression in cell biology Universal scaling laws in ecosystems, including the species-area law, Kleiber’s law, Paradox of the Plankton Universality of the genetic code Universality of thermodynamic utilization in microbial communities Universal scaling laws in the tree of life The question of what can be learned from studying universal phenomena in biology will also be discussed. Universal phenomena, by their very nature, shed little light on detailed microscopic levels of description. Yet there is no point in seeking idiosyncratic mechanistic explanations for phenomena whose explanation is found in rather general principles, such as the central limit theorem, that every microscopic mechanism is constrained to obey. Thus, physical perspectives may be better suited to answering certain questions such as universality than traditional biological perspectives. Concomitantly, it must be recognized that the identification and understanding of universal phenomena may not be a good answer to questions that have traditionally occupied biological scientists. Lastly, I plan to talk about what is perhaps the central question of universality in biology: why does the phenomenon of life occur at all? Is it an inevitable consequence of the laws of physics or some special geochemical accident? What methodology could even begin to answer this question? I will try to explain why traditional approaches to biology do not aim to answer this question, by comparing with our understanding of superconductivity as a physical phenomenon, and with the theory of universal computation. References Nigel Goldenfeld, Tommaso Biancalani, Farshid Jafarpour. Universal biology and the statistical mechanics of early life. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 375, 20160341 (14 pages) (2017). Nigel Goldenfeld and Carl R. Woese. Life is Physics: evolution as a collective phenomenon far from equilibrium. Ann. Rev. Cond. Matt. Phys. 2, 375-399 (2011).

We are interested in understanding how microbes impact the behavior of host animals. Animal nervous systems likely evolved in environments richly surrounded by microbes, yet the impact of bacteria on nervous system function has been relatively under-studied. A challenge has been to identify systems in which both host and microbe are amenable to genetic manipulation, and which enable high-throughput behavioral screening in response to defined and naturalistic conditions. To accomplish these goals, we use an animal host — the roundworm C. elegans, which feeds on bacteria — in combination with its natural gut microbiome to identify inter-organismal signals driving host-microbe interactions and decision-making. C. elegans has some of the most extensive molecular, neurobiological and genetic tools of any multicellular eukaryote, and, coupled with the ease of gnotobiotic culture in these worms, represents a highly attractive system in which to study microbial influence on host behavior. Using this system, we discovered that commensal bacterial metabolites directly modulate nervous system function of their host. Beneficial gut microbes of the genus Providencia produce the neuromodulator tyramine in the C. elegans intestine. Using a combination of behavioral analysis, neurogenetics, metabolomics and bacterial genetics we established that bacterially produced tyramine is converted to octopamine in C. elegans, which acts directly in sensory neurons to reduce odor aversion and increase sensory preference for Providencia. We think that this type of sensory modulation may increase association of C. elegans with these microbes, increasing availability of this nutrient-rich food source for the worm and its progeny, while facilitating dispersal of the bacteria.

Microbes make up the vast majority of the tree of life. While we know very little about most microbial species, large-scale sequencing is giving us glimpses of the diversity that exists both within species and in ecosystems. The challenge now is to find the patterns in this diversity and understand them. This session features provocative talks on attempts to meet that challenge.