Why Quorum Sensing Controls Private Goods

Cell-cell communication, also termed quorum sensing (QS), is a widespread process that coordinates gene expression in bacterial populations. The generally accepted view is that QS optimizes the cell density-dependent benefit attained from cooperative behaviors, often in the form of secreted products...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Martin Schuster, D. Joseph Sexton, Burkhard A. Hense
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2017-05-01
Series:Frontiers in Microbiology
Subjects:
Online Access:http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fmicb.2017.00885/full
id doaj-4bf275a1ba79455691c04a43e3906aeb
record_format Article
spelling doaj-4bf275a1ba79455691c04a43e3906aeb2020-11-24T23:18:38ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Microbiology1664-302X2017-05-01810.3389/fmicb.2017.00885261609Why Quorum Sensing Controls Private GoodsMartin Schuster0D. Joseph Sexton1Burkhard A. Hense2Department of Microbiology, Oregon State UniversityCorvallis, OR, United StatesDepartment of Microbiology, Oregon State UniversityCorvallis, OR, United StatesInstitute of Computational Biology, Helmholtz Zentrum MünchenNeuherberg, GermanyCell-cell communication, also termed quorum sensing (QS), is a widespread process that coordinates gene expression in bacterial populations. The generally accepted view is that QS optimizes the cell density-dependent benefit attained from cooperative behaviors, often in the form of secreted products referred to as “public goods.” This view is challenged by an increasing number of cell-associated products or “private goods” reported to be under QS-control for which a collective benefit is not apparent. A prominent example is nucleoside hydrolase from Pseudomonas aeruginosa, a periplasmic enzyme that catabolizes adenosine. Several recent studies have shown that private goods can function to stabilize cooperation by co-regulated public goods, seemingly explaining their control by QS. Here we argue that this property is a by-product of selection for other benefits rather than an adaptation. Emphasizing ecophysiological context, we propose alternative explanations for the QS control of private goods. We suggest that the benefit attained from private goods is associated with high cell density, either because a relevant ecological condition correlates with density, or because the private good is, directly or indirectly, involved in cooperative behavior. Our analysis helps guide a systems approach to QS, with implications for antivirulence drug design and synthetic biology.http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fmicb.2017.00885/fullquorum sensingcooperationcheatingpublic goodprivate goodevolutionary stability
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Martin Schuster
D. Joseph Sexton
Burkhard A. Hense
spellingShingle Martin Schuster
D. Joseph Sexton
Burkhard A. Hense
Why Quorum Sensing Controls Private Goods
Frontiers in Microbiology
quorum sensing
cooperation
cheating
public good
private good
evolutionary stability
author_facet Martin Schuster
D. Joseph Sexton
Burkhard A. Hense
author_sort Martin Schuster
title Why Quorum Sensing Controls Private Goods
title_short Why Quorum Sensing Controls Private Goods
title_full Why Quorum Sensing Controls Private Goods
title_fullStr Why Quorum Sensing Controls Private Goods
title_full_unstemmed Why Quorum Sensing Controls Private Goods
title_sort why quorum sensing controls private goods
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
series Frontiers in Microbiology
issn 1664-302X
publishDate 2017-05-01
description Cell-cell communication, also termed quorum sensing (QS), is a widespread process that coordinates gene expression in bacterial populations. The generally accepted view is that QS optimizes the cell density-dependent benefit attained from cooperative behaviors, often in the form of secreted products referred to as “public goods.” This view is challenged by an increasing number of cell-associated products or “private goods” reported to be under QS-control for which a collective benefit is not apparent. A prominent example is nucleoside hydrolase from Pseudomonas aeruginosa, a periplasmic enzyme that catabolizes adenosine. Several recent studies have shown that private goods can function to stabilize cooperation by co-regulated public goods, seemingly explaining their control by QS. Here we argue that this property is a by-product of selection for other benefits rather than an adaptation. Emphasizing ecophysiological context, we propose alternative explanations for the QS control of private goods. We suggest that the benefit attained from private goods is associated with high cell density, either because a relevant ecological condition correlates with density, or because the private good is, directly or indirectly, involved in cooperative behavior. Our analysis helps guide a systems approach to QS, with implications for antivirulence drug design and synthetic biology.
topic quorum sensing
cooperation
cheating
public good
private good
evolutionary stability
url http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fmicb.2017.00885/full
work_keys_str_mv AT martinschuster whyquorumsensingcontrolsprivategoods
AT djosephsexton whyquorumsensingcontrolsprivategoods
AT burkhardahense whyquorumsensingcontrolsprivategoods
_version_ 1725580840336883712