N. Y.: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press; 1989. 58. Shi W, Zusman DR: The two motility systems

of Myxococcus xanthus show different selective PD0332991 price advantages on various surfaces. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1993,90(8):3378–3382.PubMedCrossRef 59. Spormann AM, Kaiser AD: Gliding movements in Myxococcus xanthus . J Bacteriol 1995,177(20):5846–5852.PubMed 60. Astling DP, Lee JY, Zusman DR: Differential effects of chemoreceptor methylation-domain mutations on swarming and development in the social bacterium Myxococcus xanthus . Mol Microbiol 2006,59(1):45–55.PubMedCrossRef 61. Kroos L, Kuspa A, Kaiser D: A global analysis of developmentally regulated genes in Myxococcus xanthus . Dev Biol 1986,117(1):252–266.PubMedCrossRef 62. Harry EJ, Pogliano K, Losick www.selleckchem.com/products/tariquidar.html R: Use of immunofluorescence to visualize cell-specific gene expression during sporulation Selleck Liproxstatin-1 in Bacillus subtilis . J Bacteriol 1995,177(12):3386–3393.PubMed 63. Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ: Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol 1990,215(3):403–410.PubMed

Authors’ contributions PLH conceived the general outline of the experiments. SAF, NSB and PLH participated in planning and executing all molecular constructs and performed the assays. SAF performed the Immunofluorescence. SAF and PLH crafted the manuscript and constructed figures and movies. All authors have read and Molecular motor approved the final manuscript.”
“Background The physiological activities of bacteria growing in biofilms are difficult to divine, because these activities are diverse, change with time as the biofilm develops, and are subject to extreme micro scale spatial heterogeneity [1]. It is also

clear that the metabolism and activities of a particular biofilm will be shaped by the specific chemical and physical environment in which it grows. These realities make it difficult to develop a consensus picture of the physiology of the biofilm state as there is so little overlap in the lists of genes differentially expressed between the planktonic and biofilm states of Pseudomonas aeruginosa prepared by different experimenters [2–7]. However, there are biofilm physiological traits, such as antimicrobial tolerance [8] and reduced growth rate [1], for which there is considerable consensus. These robust phenotypes, with their functional and evolutionary importance, should have discernable biochemical and genetic bases. We sought to understand these phenotypes with an unconventional interpretation of transcriptional profiling studies. Conventional interpretations of transcriptional profiling studies compare two paired data sets that differ in a single controlled variable (e.g., iron concentration, quorum sensing signal molecule addition).