B. subtilis biofilm actively expands toward a competing S. plymuthica colony.
When grown on a solid biofilm-inducing medium,
B. sutbilis biofilms form symmetrical, circular colonies. To determine the effect of a competing
S. plymuthica colony on the development of a
B. subtilis biofilm, the two species were inoculated next to each other on a solid biofilm medium. After 2 days, the
B. subtilis colony reached
S. plymuthica, forming a thick wrinkle around its edge and penetrating toward its center. By the third day,
B. subtilis biofilm completely engulfed the
S. plymuthica colony, covering it with a thin, unstructured film and enclosing it within the circular wrinkle (
Fig. 1A). The location and shape of the
B. subtilis center of the biofilm did not change during the interaction with
S. plymuthica. However, the biofilm colony advanced asymmetrically toward the
S. plymuthica colony, breaking from its usual circular shape (
Fig. 1A).
We next examined the mechanisms that could mediate this asymmetric expansion toward a competitor. Many bacterial cells are capable of directional swimming using their flagella (
28). The genetic basis of flagellar swimming in
B. subtilis is well known.
B. subtilis has peritrichous flagella (
29) that propel the cell forward (
30,
31). Each flagellum is composed of a basal body, a hook, and a filament composed of many flagellin monomers (
32). The flagellin is encoded by the
hag gene, which is transcribed by a σ
D RNA polymerase encoded by
sigD (
33). In addition, flagellar rotation can also be controlled by chemotaxis (
28). To assess whether motility and chemotaxis are responsible for the asymmetrical spreading of the
B. subtilis biofilm, two motility mutants, the Δ
sigD and Δ
hag strains, and two chemotaxis mutants, the Δ
cheA and Δ
cheY strains (
28,
31,
34), were tested. Again, the parental
B. subtilis and the mutant strains were inoculated next to
S. plymuthica at various distances and allowed to grow for 3 days. The asymmetry of each colony was quantified as the ratio between the vertical radius extending toward the
S. plymuthica colony and the opposite vertical radius. Wild-type
B. subtilis and all four mutants exhibited similar asymmetrical growth toward the
S. plymuthica colony, at inoculation distances of <1.5 cm (
Fig. 1B). Those results suggest that neither flagellar motility nor chemotaxis is required for the ability of
B. subtilis to expand specifically in the direction of a competitor.
We next decided to examine which component of the
S. plymuthica colony could promote this behavior. We repeated the experiment, but this time, the asymmetrical expansions toward live
S. plymuthica cells, heat-killed
S. plymuthica, or a supernatant of
S. plymuthica spotted next to the
B. subtilis colony were compared. The supernatant of
S. plymuthica culture had no effect on the expansion of
B. subtilis, further supporting the conclusion that the movement of
B. subtilis biofilm was not initiated by signaling molecules secreted by the competitor and did not involve chemotaxis (
Fig. 1C). On the other hand,
S. plymuthica cells killed by heat promoted asymmetrical expansion, similarly to live
S. plymuthica cells (
Fig. 1C). This raised the possibility that this collective movement could be aided by organic polymers associated with
S. plymuthica cells. We therefore directly tested the possibility of
B. subtilis movement being aided by the exopolysaccharide (EPS) of the competitor colony. EPS from an
S. plymuthica colony was isolated and spotted next to
B. subtilis. Indeed,
B. subtilis was able to expand toward isolated EPS but not toward phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) (
Fig. 1D). These results suggest that asymmetrical expansion might be achieved by a sliding motion and that EPS can be shared between different species to facilitate this motion.
It was previously shown that
B. subtilis is capable of using its own matrix components, primarily EPS encoded by the
eps operon, to slide toward new territories (
35,
36). We therefore assessed the contribution of matrix components to asymmetric expansion. We tested the ability of the Δ
eps and Δ
tasA mutants (lacking the protein component of the extracellular matrix) to asymmetrically expand toward its competitor. The Δ
eps mutant could not specifically expand toward
S. plymuthica at any of the tested distances. The Δ
tasA mutant was capable of asymmetric expansion, but only at shorter distances (
Fig. 1E).
Taken together, these results demonstrate that
B. subtilis biofilms are capable of directional movement toward their competitors. Interestingly, this collective migration occurs on top of 1.5% agar, which is a concentration 2-fold higher than the maximal concentration permitting sliding in
B. subtilis monocultures (
37), consistent with similar observations that were recently made for additional interspecies interactions between
B. subtilis and
Streptomyces spp. (
38,
39). This movement does not require flagellar motility or chemotaxis. Instead, the cells in the expanding biofilm colony are likely sliding on the extracellular matrix produced by their own colony and, here, also by their competitor.
The ability of B. subtilis to eliminate S. plymuthica cells is mediated by bacillaene and by the extracellular protease AprE, but not by ECM.
Next, we tested the outcome of the above-described interaction between the competing species regarding their viability. We determined the absolute (
Fig. 2A and
B) and relative (
Fig. 2C) CFU of both species before contact with the competitor, at the time of the initial direct contact, and after engulfment. Contact with
B. subtilis led to a dramatic reduction in the viability of
S. plymuthica (
Fig. 2A and
C), while the number of viable
B. subtilis cells actually increased during the interaction (
Fig. 2B and
C). Thus, upon reaching its competitor,
B. subtilis was able to efficiently kill it. Unlike the ability to slide in the direction of
S. plymuthica, the ability to eradicate it was not dependent on extracellular matrix (ECM) production, as all matrix mutants reduced the amount of viable
S. plymuthica cells when inoculated at a short distance to compensate for their inability to expand toward it (
Fig. 2D; see also Fig. S1 in the supplemental material).
A nonribosomal peptide that contributes to the biocontrol capacity of
B. subtilis is surfactin, a surface- and membrane-acting lipopeptide (
40,
41). Surfactin mediates both movement by reducing surface tension to promote collective flagellar and sliding motility (
42,
43) and toxicity of
B. subtilis toward biofilm competitors from related species (
44). While the Δ
srfAA mutant had a defect in expansion toward
S. plymuthica colonies consistent with its role in promoting sliding motility (data not shown), it was still capable of eradicating the colony cells after the formation of a direct contact (Fig. S2), further suggesting that the ability of
B. subtilis to kill its competitor is independent from motility. Taken together, these results demonstrate that asymmetric expansion creates the opportunity for contact but is not essential for the eradication of
S. plymuthica by
B. subtilis.
B. subtilis has a repertoire of antibacterial molecules it can produce to kill competitors. To determine which of those molecules are involved in the elimination of
S. plymuthica in our system, we tested which antibiotics are secreted by
B. subtilis under the conditions used in this study. We allowed
B. subtilis to form biofilm colonies on solid medium and analyzed the medium to identify molecules secreted by the bacterial cells using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis (Fig. S3). We detected the presence of bacillaene (
45,
46), a polyketide antibiotic synthesized by enzymatic complex encoded in a
pks gene cluster and previously implicated in bacterial predator-prey interactions (
47) (
Fig. 3A, left). We therefore set out to test whether this is the molecule responsible for killing the competing colony.
To determine the role of bacillaene in competitor eradication, we tested the ability of the Δ
pks mutant, which is unable to produce bacillaene (
Fig. 3A, right), to kill
S. plymuthica. As expected, the engulfing wild-type
B. subtilis colony promoted the death of
S. plymuthica cells, as reflected by a drop in the number of viable cells. However, when engulfed by the Δ
pks mutant,
S. plymuthica cells retained stable cell counts (
Fig. 3B). Moreover, when the
S. plymuthica cells interacting with the wild-type
B. subtilis were examined by light and electron microscopy, there was a clear impact on their morphology, and an increased number of lysed cells was observed. No such effect could be detected in cells interacting with the Δ
pks mutant strain; the cells retained an intact morphology and a thick extracellular matrix (
Fig. 3C and
D). Next, we extracted the molecules secreted by a
B. subtilis colony and examined their effect on planktonic growth of
S. plymuthica. Molecules secreted into the solid medium by the wild-type strain, but not the Δ
pks mutant, inhibited the growth of
S. plymuthica (Fig. S4). Moreover, deletion of the
pks operon completely eliminated the toxicity of
B. subtilis conditioned medium against
S. plymuthica (
Fig. 3E). Interestingly, the
pks operon is highly conserved in bacilli residing exclusively in the rhizosphere but not in
B. cereus and
B. anthracis, which reside in a broader range of hosts (Fig. S5). Consistent with the hypothesis that polyketide synthesis (PKS) is relevant to the competitiveness of
B. subtilis in the soil, the Δ
pks mutant could not eliminate an additional Gram-negative competitor from a different genus,
Pseudomonas chlororaphis (Fig. S6).
In addition to antibiotics,
B. subtilis biofilm cells are also capable of producing extracellular proteases that allow them to “mine” extracellular material, such as dead cells, breaking these macromolecules down into amino acids that can then be imported and used for further growth (
48). As the CFU of
B. subtilis increased following interaction with
S. plymuthica cells (
Fig. 2B), we decided to examine the contribution of the main extracellular proteases (AprE, Vpr, and Mpr) to the ability of
B. subtilis to overcome its competitor during the interaction. The deletion of
aprE, but not of the other proteases, inhibited the eradication of
S. plymuthica (
Fig. 3F and S7). However, its effect on viability of the competitor was less dramatic than that of
pks (
Fig. 3F), suggesting an indirect mechanism. One intriguing possibility is that consuming dead competitor cells provides
B. subtilis with a growth advantage, and the increased rate of growth further enhances its ability to successfully compete and eradicate its neighbor.
Overall, our results separate two biological properties that contribute to the success of B. subtilis during the interaction with S. plymuthica, EPS-dependent sliding movement that leads to asymmetric expansion toward its competitor, and bacillaene-dependent killing once the two colonies make contact (summarized in Table S1).
Plant host promotes pks-dependent killing via Spo0A.
Both
B. subtilis and
S. plymuthica reside in the soil rhizosphere of temperate habitats, where the temperature fluctuates between 15°C and 23°C (
49). We therefore decided to test whether
pks-dependent killing also occurs at the environmental temperature. Surprisingly, while being highly effective in killing
S. plymuthica at 30°C, we found that
B. subtilis could not efficiently kill it at 23°C (
Fig. 4A). However, in the natural niche, additional species are present, most importantly, the host plant. Therefore, we decided to set up a plant-host model system.
Eruca sativa (salad rocket) is a winter annual undomesticated wild flowering plant that grows in nature mostly around the Mediterranean basin (
50). It belongs to the Brassicaceae family, which includes various natural plant hosts for both
Bacillus and
Serratia species (
51).
In the presence of an
E. sativa plant host at 23°C, the killing of
S. plymuthica was increased from 2-fold to 26-fold in a
pks-dependent manner (
Fig. 4B). Again, the killing was linked to predation and resulted in an increased number of
B. subtilis cells, and this result could not be attributed to growth induction of
B. subtilis by the host (
Fig. 4C). In contrast, while the growth of
S. plymuthica was indeed improved when grown together with
E. sativa (
Fig. 4B), it still could not overcome the
pks-dependent killing in three-party interaction experiments.
Even in the absence of the plant, the addition of root exudate was sufficient to induce the killing of
S. plymuthica by
B. subtilis, suggesting that this induction is mediated by a factor secreted by the plant (
Fig. 4D). In order to better understand the molecular mechanism of induction of
pks-dependent killing, we tested the effect of the root exudate on the expression of the
pks operon. As shown, purified root exudate of
E. sativa had no impact on cell growth (
Fig. 4E) but had significantly (
P < 10
−9) induced
pks expression (
Fig. 4F). In contrast, we could detect no induction of
pks,
eps, or
tasA expression by direct contact with an
S. plymuthica colony during expansion and engulfment (Fig. S8) or by its conditioned medium (data not shown).
The transcription of the
pksA-R operon (the operon containing
pksA and
pskR and the genetic material in between) initiates from a promoter located upstream of
pksC and is regulated by two master regulators (
52), CodY, which senses the levels of branched amino acids (
53,
54), and the transition phase regulator AbrB (
55). In turn, AbrB is inhibited by the master regulator of sporulation and biofilm development, Spo0A (
56). Previous publications indicated that plant exudates of tomato and
Arabidopsis spp. can induce Spo0A by several independent mechanisms (
57,
58) and therefore may repress AbrB. We used a luciferase reporter driven by the
pksC promoter to measure the induction of
pks expression by root exudate in the wild type and in the Δ
spo0A, Δ
abrB, and Δ
codY mutant strains. The activation of the
pks promoter by the root exudate required Spo0A and AbrB but not CodY (
Fig. 4G). Two target genes of Spo0A (
sinI and
sdpA) activated by low Spo0A-P were also induced by exudates of
E. sativa similarly to the
pks operon (Fig. S9). Altogether, these results support the hypothesis that the plant increases the
pks-dependent killing of
S. plymuthica by
B. subtilis by inducing the transcription of the
pks operon in an Spo0A-dependent manner.
pks-induced killing of S. plymuthica allows B. subtilis to enhance the systemic resistance of the plant.
Finally, we wondered whether the plant host has an underlying preference toward
B. subtilis. Both
B. subtilis and
S. plymuthica are considered biocontrol species (
40,
59). Therefore, we explored their relative contributions to the activation of the plant’s immune system. Both bacterial species were inoculated on the root, either alone or in competition, and the bacteria were allowed to form root-associated communities. Next, the pathogen
Pseudomonas syringae was injected directly into the leaves of precolonized
E. sativa plants. After a week, the area of leaf necrosis was measured (
Fig. 5A). As no direct contact occurred between the root-associated biofilms and
P. syringae, enhanced resistance is the readout of the immune response of the plant hosts. Biofilms containing
B. subtilis alone or together with
S. plymuthica, but not
S. plymuthica alone, provided significantly enhanced systemic resistance (
Fig. 5B). When inoculated alone, the Δ
pks mutant could provide protection similar to that of the wild-type
B. subtilis, further demonstrating that
pks is not required for this aspect of interaction. However, when inoculated together with
S. plymuthica, the Δ
pks mutant offered no protection to the plant (
Fig. 5C). This was due to its inability to compete with
S. plymuthica, as demonstrated by the CFU count (
Fig. 5D). This result is a strong indication that the
pks operon is fundamental to
B. subtilis-plant interactions in competitive environments. Furthermore, these results could indicate a mechanism by which plants shape the rhizosphere communities by specifically regulating antibiotic production.