Bacillus cereus displays a high diversity of lifestyles and ecological niches and include beneficial as well as pathogenic strains. These strains are widespread in the environment, are found on inert as well as on living surfaces and contaminate persistently the production lines of the food industry. Biofilms are suspected to play a key role in this ubiquitous distribution and in this persistency. Indeed, B. cereus produces a variety of biofilms which differ in their architecture and mechanism of formation, possibly reflecting an adaptation to various environments. Depending on the strain, B. cereus has the ability to grow as immersed or floating biofilms, and to secrete within the biofilm a vast array of metabolites, surfactants, bacteriocins, enzymes, and toxins, all compounds susceptible to act on the biofilm itself and/or on its environment. Within the biofilm, B. cereus exists in different physiological states and is able to generate highly resistant and adhesive spores, which themselves will increase the resistance of the bacterium to antimicrobials or to cleaning procedures. Current researches show that, despite similarities with the regulation processes and effector molecules involved in the initiation and maturation of the extensively studied Bacillus subtilis biofilm, important differences exists between the two species. The present review summarizes the up to date knowledge on biofilms produced by B. cereus and by two closely related pathogens, Bacillus thuringiensis and Bacillus anthracis. Economic issues caused by B. cereus biofilms and management strategies implemented to control these biofilms are included in this review, which also discuss the ecological and functional roles of biofilms in the lifecycle of these bacterial species and explore future developments in this important research area.

Bacillus thuringiensis can produce a floating biofilm which includes two parts: a ring and a pellicle. The ring is a thick structure which sticks to the culture container, while the pellicle extends over the whole liquid surface and joins the ring. We have followed over time, from 16 to 96 h, sporulation in the two biofilm parts. Sporulation was followed in situ in 48-wells polystyrene microtiterplates with a fluorescence binocular stereomicroscope and a spoIID-yfp transcriptional fusion. Sporulation took place much earlier in the ring than in the pellicle. In 20 h-aged biofilms, spoIID was expressed only in the ring, which could be seen as a green fluorescent circle surrounding the non-fluorescent pellicle. However, after 48 h of culture, the pellicle started to express spoIID in specific area corresponding to protrusions, and after 96 h both the ring and the whole pellicle expressed spoIID. Spore counts and microscopy observations of the ring and the pellicle harvested separately confirmed these results and revealed that sporulation occured 24 h-later in the pellicle comparatively to the ring, although both structures contained nearly 100% spores after 96 h of culture. We hypothesize that two mechanisms, due to microenvironments in the biofilm, can explain this difference. First, the ring experiences a decreased concentration of nutrients earlier than the pellicle, because of a lower exchange area with the culture medium. An second, the ring is exposed to partial dryness. Both reasons could speed up sporulation in this biofilm structure. Our results also suggest that spores in the biofilm display a phenotypic heterogeneity. These observations might be of particular significance for the food industry, since the biofilm part sticking to container walls – the ring – is likely to contain spores and will therefore resist both to washing and to cleaning procedures, and will be able to restart a new biofilm when food production has resumed.