Tal­mu­dic Ques­tion #200 ─ Our Twit­ter Poll

by Christoph

To cel­e­brate our two hun­dredth Tal­mu­dic Ques­tion "What is the lead­ing cause of bac­te­r­ial or ar­chaeal death?" we made a poll on Twit­ter. Thanks to our fol­low­ers we re­ceived more than 100 votes, wow! We sug­gested the fol­low­ing pos­si­ble an­swers, pre­sented here with the re­sults:

(This is an ac­cu­mu­lated ta­ble of the re­sults of two polls as Twit­ter only al­lows polls with 4 choices each.)

I will be wary of scor­ing the choices made by our Twit­ter fol­low­ers, and just leave it at that. Think about it your­self ─ in good tal­mu­dic tra­di­tion! In the fol­low­ing, I will make some re­marks on what is known about each of our pro­posed death causes. Since my "re­marks" add up to a calcu­la­ted read­ing time of just un­der 8 min­utes, I sug­gest that you sim­ply jump to the num­bered items that in­ter­est you the most; the num­ber­ing fol­lows that of the poll.

1. Sui­cide  Bac­te­r­ial cells can com­mit sui­cide, take Bacil­lus sub­tilis for ex­am­ple. Sporu­la­tion of this bac­terium is a cell densi­ty‑de­pendent re­sponse to nu­tri­ent de­pri­va­tion that re­sults in the forma­tion of an en­dospore within the so-called "mother cell." The re­lease of the ma­ture spore hap­pens by ly­sis of the mother cell. Mem­brane fis­sions in the mother cell re­leases the chro­mo­so­mal DNA into the en­vi­ron­ment and pre­ceeds degra­da­tion of the pep­ti­do­gyl­can. The ex­pres­sion of an extra­cellular nu­cle­ase, NucB, that de­grades the re­leased chrDNA is trig­gered by the mother cell-spe­cific sigma fac­tor σK, a clear sign that this is not an ac­ci­dent but pro­grammed cell death (PCD). (An asi­de: the term 'apop­to­sis' should be avoided here, since cell bi­ol­o­gists have re­served it for multicel­lular or­gan­isms with very dis­tinct con­served path­ways for apop­to­sis that haven't yet been traced down to bac­te­ria and ar­chaea.) The sui­cide of a sporu­lat­ing Bacil­lus mother cell is thus quite com­parable to Japan­ese sep­puku (of­ten called harakiri in the West), in which the self-slayer rams a short sword into his stom­ach and in­testines to cause him­self to leak and bleed to death. It could very well be that the self‑dissolution of the mother cell evolved to give the ma­ture spore a chance to spread and not be trapped, so to speak, in the cy­to­plas­mic soup and vis­cous chrDNA surround­ing it (ex­per­i­men­tal ev­i­dence for this is still miss­ing). Most cer­tainly, how­ever, sui­cide is not the lead­ing death cause among bacilli, be­cause in wild-type strains the pro­por­tion of sporu­lating cells in a pop­u­la­tion tends to be low, in the <30% range, and is high in lab­o­ra­tory strains (>80%) only be­cause they have been se­lected for to study, you guessed it, sporu­la­tion.

In mul­ti­cel­lu­lar or­gan­isms, it is com­mon for in­di­vid­ual cells to com­mit sui­cide for the ben­e­fit of the whole tis­sue, for ex­am­ple, dur­ing tis­sue re­mod­el­ing in de­vel­op­ment ─ think of the "disappear­ance" of the ini­tially ex­ist­ing webs be­tween the fin­gers of the hands in em­bryos. A com­pa­ra­ble process also ex­ists in bac­te­ria, an­other case of pro­grammed cell death (PCD) and dis­tinct from sporu­la­tion.

When poly­mor­phonu­clear leuko­cytes of the hu­man im­mune sys­tem sense nearby bac­te­ria, they se­crete hy­dro­gen per­ox­ide, H2O2, in a burst to kill them dur­ing phago­cy­to­sis ("bleach" is mention­ed in: death cause 6. "other"). If these bac­te­ria hap­pen to be re­lated to E. coli STEC or Shigella dys­enteriae car­ry­ing a 933W or H‑19B prophage (phage lambda rel­a­tives), the hy­dro­gen per­ox­ide re­leased by the leuko­cytes trig­gers the in­duc­tion of the prophage in a small part of the bac­te­r­ial po­pulation, as stud­ied by Loś et al. (2013). Dur­ing phage prop­a­ga­tion in the host, the phage‑encoded stxAB genes are ex­pressed and Shiga toxin syn­the­sized. When phage prop­a­ga­tion fi­nally re­sults in host ly­sis, the phage prog­eny is re­leased to­gether with Shiga toxin.

That's when the counter at­tack starts: while the B sub­unit of Shiga toxin docks to the mem­brane of hu­man cells car­ry­ing the cog­nate re­cep­tor and trig­gers its up­take, the A sub­unit, once internal­ized, at­tacks the cy­toso­lic ri­bo­somes, cut­ting and thus in­ac­ti­vat­ing the ri­bo­so­mal 28S rRNA, thus block­ing trans­la­tion. And as it is with tox­ins, they are not con­sumed by one-time use. Cells with in­ac­ti­vated ri­bo­somes are doomed. Whether one can speak of "al­tru­ism" here re­mains to be dis­cussed. What is clear, how­ever, is that the self‑sacrifice of a few bac­te­r­ial cells pro­motes the sur­vival of the en­tire pop­u­la­tion.

2. Ex­haus­tion  In the dis­qus com­ments sec­tion for TQ #200, our reader Morris39 re­marked (com­plained?) that "star­va­tion" is miss­ing from the list of death causes. There is no doubt that for bac­teria in the lab­o­ra­tory, "star­va­tion" is the pri­mary cause of death af­ter nu­tri­ents are de­pleted. In E. coli, for ex­am­ple, the death phase be­gins af­ter ap­prox­i­mately one week into sta­tion­ary phase with suc­ces­sive ly­sis of the cul­ture. Note that it is not so much the lack of nu­tri­ents that causes death, but the lack of ef­fi­cient dis­posal of toxic meta­bolic end prod­ucts in a con­tained cul­ture and shifts in pH. But then, and this is note­wor­thy, there is a small per­cent­age of cells that keep them­­selves alive for long time pe­ri­ods in the mass grave of a cul­ture by gorg­ing on ca­dav­ers, "GASP­ing for life in sta­tion­ary phase" as Me­chas Zam­brano and Roberto termed this habit. In such a station­ary cul­ture, fee­ble growth and death bal­ance each other such that the cell num­ber re­mains al­most con­stant over many months.

Fig­ure 1. For­ma­tion of het­e­ro­cysts (open ar­row­head) and akinetes (closed arrow­head) in chains of the fil­a­men­tous cyano­bacterium An­abaena cylin­drica. Cour­tesy of J. E. Frías and E. Flo­res, C.I.C.I.C., Uni­versidad de Sevilla, Spain. Fron­tispiece: Sin­gle plaques of Sal­mo­nella phage PRD1 on agar plate. By B. Henze, Leib­niz In­sti­tute DSMZ. Source

Un­like E. coli, bac­te­ria like Deinococ­cus ra­dio­du­rans and a num­ber of cyanobac­te­ria can­not be starved to death. Fila­mentous cyanobac­te­ria like Nos­toc or An­abaena form so-called Akinetes within strings of cells (Fig­ure 1) un­der unfa­vorable growth con­di­tions. Akinetes come close to Bacil­lus spores with re­spect to long-term re­sis­tance to ad­verse phy­sical con­di­tions, they're not heat re­sis­tant though. The sur­vival skills of Deinococ­cus are by all means ex­treme (see here STC). In a re­cent post from 2021, Elio wrote:" D. radio­durans [also] placed out­side the In­ter­na­tional Space Sta­tion, re­vealed that cells in pel­lets 500 mi­crons thick stayed alive af­ter 3 years in space. Once cul­ti­vated, they re­paired their dam­aged DNA via the prod­ucts of uvrA gene (nucleo­tide ex­ci­sion re­pair) and uvdE gene (UV-dam­age ex­ci­sion re­pair)." Un­der space con­di­tions there is cer­tainly no such thing as "dor­mancy" or "hi­ber­na­tion" or even "sus­pended an­i­ma­tion," and bi­ol­ogy lacks an apt term for this form of un­life.

"Ex­haus­tion" in bac­te­ria could also mean the de­cli­ne of their "re­pro­duc­ti­ve out­put," in other words senes­cence. That's ex­actly what Mar­tin Ack­er­mann stud­ied in Cau­lo­bact­er cres­cen­tus, a bac­terium with a di­mor­phic life cy­cle (see here is STC). Briefly, a "stalked cell" at­taches to a sub­strate via the hold­fast on the tip of its stalk, grows, and sub­se­quently di­vides, with the mother cell re­main­ing at­tached while the fla­gel­lated daugh­ter cell, the "swarmer cell," takes flight (and turns into a stalked cell once it finds a suit­able sub­strate, thus com­plet­ing the cy­cle). By flush­ing away the swarm­ers with fresh medium and count­ing di­vi­sion events in the stalk­ers, he found that Cau­lo­bac­ter cells do in­deed grad­u­ally age and cea­se di­vi­ding af­ter 60 ge­ne­ra­tions, on ave­ra­ge. While some cells pro­du­ced up to 130 pro­ge­ny cells in 300 hours, most stop­ped di­vi­ding or di­vi­ded more slow­ly with in­crea­s­ing age.

Yet, what is true for Caulobac­ter must not nec­es­sar­ily be true for ele­phants or E. coli. Wang et al. (2010) seeded cells of two dis­tantly re­lated E. coli strains, B/r and MG1655, into mi­croflu­idic chan­nels and fol­lowed the steady-state growth of ~105 in­di­vid­ual "mother" cells over >100 gen­er­a­tions, that is, cell di­vi­sions vis­i­ble by mi­cro­scopic in­spec­tion. They found strik­ingly con­stant growth rates of mother cells and their im­me­di­ate sis­ter cells for hun­dreds of gen­er­a­tions. De­spite this ro­bust growth, cells died due to ac­cu­mu­la­tion of dam­ages dur­ing the course of the ex­per­i­ments. This was most ev­i­dent in MG1655 lexA3 mu­tant cells that are un­able to re­spond to dam­age via the SOS re­sponse and had a con­stant mor­tal­ity rate of ~3% from the start. In con­trast, the death rate wild ­type MG1655 cells grad­u­ally in­creased from <0.1% at start to reach <2% af­ter 150 gen­er­a­tions. The au­thors con­cluded:"from the qual­i­ta­tive dif­fer­ence in death rate be­tween MG1655 and its lexA3 mu­tant de­riv­a­tive (...) that death of E. coli cells can­not be due to ran­dom events such as DNA da­mage but must be a con­se­quence of growth-in­de­pen­dent ac­cu­mu­la­tion of lethal el­e­ment." Death by a "lethal el­e­ment" but not senes­cence or "ex­haus­tion" ─ this isn't easy to com­pre­hend.

3. Mur­der by kin  I was a bit sur­prised at how few of our sur­vey par­tic­i­pants con­sid­ered "mur­der by kin" to be a rel­e­vant cause of death for bac­te­ria. It is now well known that bac­te­ria and ar­chaea in the wild pre­fer to con­gre­gate in biofilms. And such ag­gre­gates are the venue for every conceiv­able form of co­op­er­a­tion and com­pe­ti­tion, and this ap­plies to mixed‑species and mono‑species biofilms alike. When it comes to co‑inhabitants in biofilms, Vib­rio cholerae, for ex­am­ple, are not squea­mish: all other bac­te­ria that come close enough to them are first shot on sus­pect ─ with their T6SS ─ and only if those hit have an an­ti­dote to the in­jected toxin do they sur­vive this "identi­ty check." This may well be kin, that is, a ge­net­i­cally al­most iden­ti­cal Vib­rio cholerae lack­ing the an­tidote. We had de­scribed this mur­der in the fam­ily set­ting in de­tail here, and men­tioned that it is by no means re­stricted to the Vib­rios. Sev­eral "se­cre­tion sys­tems" ─ we cur­rently know nine ─ are wide­spread among bac­te­ria, and they prob­a­bly all serve the pur­pose of keep­ing un­wanted neigh­bors at arm's length, whether they are from the closer or more dis­tant fam­ily.

Fig­ure 2. © A high den­sity of phage par­ticles within Wol­bachia is shown; phage tails are oc­ca­sion­ally vis­i­ble and noted by white ar­row­heads in the in­set. Bar=200 nm; in­set bar=100 nm. (D) Virion-free (lo­wer right) and virion-con­tain­ing Wol­bachia (up­per right) lo­cal­ized near two N. vit­ripen­nis sper­matids are shown. Solid ar­rowheads de­note phage par­ti­cles in­side Wol­bachia, and Ax and Md de­note sper­matid ax­onemes and mi­to­chon­dr­ial de­riv­a­tives, re­spec­tively. Bar = 200 nm. Source

4. Pre­da­tion by phages  By a wide mar­gin, the pre­ferred cause of death of bac­te­ria and ar­chaea in our poll (see fron­tispiece). And in­deed, to my knowl­edge, there are no de­scribed bac­te­ria and ar­chaea that are not preyed upon by well over a dozen species‑specific phages (in­clud­ing those with a broad host range). Not even those that sport mul­ti­ple so­phis­ti­cated phage de­fense sys­tems es­cape phage preda­tion, but in­di­vid­ual cells may. And this is also true for those species that we know only from their genome se­quences, which usu­ally con­tain in­te­grated prophage genomes or tell­tale rem­nants thereof.

I pick here only one par­tic­u­larly im­pres­sive ex­am­ple, the phage WO, which has ac­com­pa­nied Wol­bachia since this bac­terium in­fected more than half of all known arthro­pods and set­tled there as en­dosym­biont (and has dra­matic influ­ences on the sex of the host's off­spring). It is dif­fi­cult to es­ti­mate, let alone mea­sure, the contribu­tion of phage WO to the death rate of in­tra­cel­lu­lar Wol­bachia (Fig­ure 2).

5. Pre­da­tion by pro­tists  In the lab, pro­tists are most of­ten suc­cess­fully fed with bac­te­ria, well‑ known ex­am­ples be­ing Acan­thamoeba (see here in STC) and, of course, Dictyo­stelium. The lat­ter eats away holes in a bac­te­r­ial lawn that look like clear phage plaques at first glance (Fig­ure 3). From such ar­ti­fi­cial lab con­di­tions, un­der which "killing by pro­tists" is the main cause of death for bac­te­ria, it is of course not pos­si­ble to ex­trap­o­late to con­di­tions in the wild, or even in the hu­man gut.

In the up­per lay­ers of the oceans, the num­ber of pic­o­cyanobac­te­ria dou­bles about every 2 days, but since their con­cen­tra­tions re­main quite sta­ble for weeks, re­gard­less of sea­sonal fluc­tu­a­tions, half of them must ei­ther die and lyse, or fall prey to preda­tors, mostly both the ubiq­ui­tous cyano­phages and pro­tists. Al­though by or­ders of mag­ni­tude less abun­dant than phages and bac­te­ria, both het­erotrophic and pho­totrophic pro­tists, which of­ten go "side­ways" in their feed­ing, are ef­ficient hunters. For ex­am­ple, a sin­gle Proro­cent­rum dino­fla­gel­late ─ more a trap­per than a hunter ─ can eas­ily catch ~50 prokary­otic cells per day in its mu­cos­phere for im­me­di­ate con­sump­tion (see here in STC).

Fig­ure 3. Dic­tyostelium (clear plaques) feed­ing on a lawn of Kleb­siella bac­te­ria (white). Im­age by Sam Manna

It is only anec­do­tal and there­fore not re­ally sci­en­tif­i­cally re­levant, but I vividly re­mem­ber the hor­ror that haunted Blan­ca Perez Sepul­veda dur­ing her PhD in David Scanlan's lab at War­wick Uni­ver­sity, UK, that the "graz­ers," the om­niv­o­rous pro­tists, would dec­i­mate her pre­cious long-term Synechococ­cus cul­tures; she found it much eas­ier to tame the phages.

6. Other causes  Alex Bis­son (@Archaeon_Alex) sug­gested bleach as one of "other causes," and that was in­deed appro­priate as physi­cians and mi­cro­bi­ol­o­gists of­ten use it for ef­ficient sur­face dis­in­fec­tion. In more nat­ural set­tings, chlo­rine-based bleaches won't play a large role as chlo­rine is sim­ply too re­ac­tive with any­thing that is even re­motely ox­i­diz­able. This is dif­fer­ent for per­ox­ide-based bleaches as hy­dro­gen per­ox­ide (H2O2) and su­per­ox­ide (•O2), which be­long to the re­ac­tive oxy­gen species (ROS), are byprod­ucts of cell me­tab­o­lism in all do­mains of life.

Many bac­te­ria avoid be­ing killed by ROS by the pro­duc­tion of cata­lases, en­zymes with among the high­est known turnover num­bers. Un­less they can't, which is the case in pic­o­cyanobac­te­ria. This de­fi­ciency in cata­lase in Prochloro­coc­cus and Syne­chococ­cus re­sults in their fail­ure to form colo­nies on solid me­dia un­less they are grown in the pres­ence of "helper" bac­te­ria like cata­lase-posi­­tive Al­teromonas (first ex­plored by Mor­ris et al. (2008) and also briefly men­tioned here in STC).

Con­clu­sion  For all the death causes we asked about, they do oc­cur in na­ture and in the lab. Each of them is the main death cause of in­di­vid­ual bac­te­r­ial cells un­der cer­tain con­di­tions. But it is per­haps pre­sump­tu­ous to try to pin down a sin­gle cause of death as the pre­do­mi­nant one among bac­te­ria and ar­chaea in gen­eral. This could also be a valid an­swer to our Tal­mu­dic Ques­tion, but was not given as a choice in the poll. Our fault. Or, was it?

 

Other Posts