Coarse Graining Escherichia coli Chemotaxis: From Multi-flagella Propulsion to Logarithmic Sensing
Various sensing mechanisms in nature can be described by the Weber–Fechner law stating that the response to varying stimuli is proportional to their relative rather than absolute changes. The chemotaxis of bacteria Escherichia coli is an example where such logarithmic sensing enables sensitivity over large range of concentrations. It has recently been experimentally demonstrated that under certain conditions E. coli indeed respond to relative gradients of ligands. We use numerical simulations of bacteria in food gradients to investigate the limits of validity of the logarithmic behavior. We model the chemotactic signaling pathway reactions, couple them to a multi-flagella model for propelling and take the effects of rotational diffusion into account to accurately reproduce the experimental observations of single cell swimming. Using this simulation scheme we analyze the type of response of bacteria subject to exponential ligand profiles and identify the regimes of absolute gradient sensing, relative gradient sensing, and a rotational diffusion dominated regime. We explore dependance of the swimming speed, average run time and the clockwise (CW) bias on ligand variation and derive a small set of relations that define a coarse grained model for bacterial chemotaxis. Simulations based on this coarse grained model compare well with microfluidic experiments on E. coli diffusion in linear and exponential gradients of aspartate.
We acknowledge the support of the following funding agencies: the Center for Modeling and Simulation in the Biosciences (BIOMS) of the University of Heidelberg (FM), the German Ministry of Education and Research (grant Nr. 03BOPAL1) (MSM), the Slovenian Research Agency (P1-0055), the European Research Council (COLSTRUCTIION 227758), and the 7th Framework Programme (ITN-COMPLOIDS 234810) (JD, JBK & TC). JD wants to acknowledge the hospitality of the Aspen Center for Physics during the summer workshop programme in August 2010.
- 9.Matthäus F, Jagodić M, Dobnikar J (2009) E. coli superdiffusion and chemotaxis – search strategy, precision and motility. J Biophys 97(4):946–957Google Scholar
- 10.Strong SP, Freedman B, Bialek W, Koberle R (1998) Adaptation and optimal chemotactic strategy for E. coli. Phys Rev E 57(4):4604–4616Google Scholar
- 16.Berg HC (2003) E. coli in motion. Biol Med Phys Biomed Eng. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 18.Berg HC, Brown DA (1974) Temporal stimulation of chemotaxis in Escherichia coli. Proc Natl Acad Soc USA 71(4):1388Google Scholar
- 20.Shimizu TS, Tu Y, Berg HC (2010) A modular gradient-sensing network for chemotaxis in Escherichia coli revealed by responses to time-varying stimuli. Mol Sys Biol 6:Art. no. 382Google Scholar
- 23.Block SM, Segall JE, Berg HC (1982) Impulse responses in bacterial chemotaxis. Cell 31:215Google Scholar
- 24.Kafri Y, daSilveira RA (2008) Steady-state chemotaxis in Escherichia coli. Phys Rev Lett 100:Art. no. 238101Google Scholar