Heterogeneity in biofilms: Table 1

Abstract

Biofilms, accumulations of microorganisms at interfaces, have been described for every aqueous system supporting life. The structure of these microbial communities ranges from monolayers of scattered single cells to thick, mucous structures of macroscopic dimensions (microbial mats; algal-microbial associations; trickling filter biofilms). During recent years the structure of biofilms from many different environments has been documented and evaluated by use of a broad variety of microscopic, physico-chemical and molecular biological techniques, revealing a generally complex 3D structure. Parallel to these investigations more and more complex mathematical models and simulations were developed to explain the development, structures, and interactions of biofilms. The forces determining the spatial structure of biofilms, including microcolonies, extracellular polymeric substances (EPS), and channels, are still the subject of controversy. To achieve conclusive explanations for the structures observed in biofilms the cooperation of both fields of investigation, modelling and experimental research, is necessary. The expanding field of molecular techniques not only allows more and more detailed documentation of the spatial distribution of species, but also of functional activities of single cells in their biofilm environment. These new methods will certainly reveal new insights in the mechanisms involved in the developmental processes involved in the formation and behavior of biofilms.

Chemotaxis of Biofilm Producing <i>Pseudomonas</i> spp. towards Refined Petroleum Oil

“…One of the major limitations faced in the process of bioremediation was the bioavailability of organic compounds on site [23]. Early studies [24] that indicate biofilm forming bacteria could be employed to overcome this limitation although the application of steady state biofilm in bioremediation was not well established. Studies indicate that biofilm-mediated bioremediation was a proficient approach and safer option since cells in biofilm had better chance of survival and adaptability especially during the stressed conditions [25,26].…”

Quantifying Biofilm Formation of &lt;i&gt;Sinorhizobium meliloti&lt;/i&gt; Bacterial Strains in Microfluidic Platforms by Measuring the Diffusion Coefficient of Polystyrene Beads

“…Potential reasons why D changes include: 1) EPS production that increases the environment's viscosity, 2) electrostatic interactions between the beads and the EPS matrix [7], 3) the irregular structure of the EPS matrix [26], 4) interactions between bacteria and beads, especially when the bacteria are at a high concentration, as is the case in cell clusters, 5) high density of stationary cells that effectively trap the beads, 6) motion of cells (e.g. swarming) that forces the microspheres' motion, or a combination of the above.…”

Negative pressure wound therapy with instillation (NPWTi): Current status, recommendations and perspectives in the context of modern wound therapy.

“…Bacteria is the most common reason for biofilm formation, however usually within a wound there is a complex biofilm formation by bacteria, fungi and protozoa embedded in a self-produced extracellular matrix of polysaccharides or other extracellular polymeric substance (EPS), cellular debris and exudates. 17 Consequently, providing a substance to the wound, should by definition remove not only the exudates and cellular debris but also influence the destruction and removal of biofilm bacteria which is a basis for its success.…”