↓ Skip to main content

Analysis of Factors Limiting Bacterial Growth in PDMS Mother Machine Devices

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
26 X users

Readers on

mendeley
138 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Analysis of Factors Limiting Bacterial Growth in PDMS Mother Machine Devices
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2018.00871
Pubmed ID
Authors

Da Yang, Anna D. Jennings, Evalynn Borrego, Scott T. Retterer, Jaan Männik

Abstract

The microfluidic mother machine platform has attracted much interest for its potential in studies of bacterial physiology, cellular organization, and cell mechanics. Despite numerous experiments and development of dedicated analysis software, differences in bacterial growth and morphology in narrow mother machine channels compared to typical liquid media conditions have not been systematically characterized. Here we determine changes in E. coli growth rates and cell dimensions in different sized dead-end microfluidic channels using high resolution optical microscopy. We find that E. coli adapt to the confined channel environment by becoming narrower and longer compared to the same strain grown in liquid culture. Cell dimensions decrease as the channel length increases and width decreases. These changes are accompanied by increases in doubling times in agreement with the universal growth law. In channels 100 μm and longer, cell doublings can completely stop as a result of frictional forces that oppose cell elongation. Before complete cessation of elongation, mechanical stresses lead to substantial deformation of cells and changes in their morphology. Our work shows that mechanical forces rather than nutrient limitation are the main growth limiting factor for bacterial growth in long and narrow channels.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 138 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 138 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 25%
Researcher 17 12%
Student > Master 16 12%
Student > Bachelor 16 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Other 12 9%
Unknown 33 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 30 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 23 17%
Physics and Astronomy 16 12%
Engineering 11 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 4%
Other 12 9%
Unknown 40 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 May 2018.
All research outputs
#2,706,892
of 25,452,734 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#2,127
of 29,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,110
of 339,415 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#70
of 603 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,452,734 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,377 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 339,415 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 603 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.