<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

HAL
open science

# Microbial biofilms: Structural plasticity and emerging properties

Arnaud A. Bridier, Romain Briandet

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

## To cite this version:

Arnaud A. Bridier, Romain Briandet. Microbial biofilms: Structural plasticity and emerging properties. Microorganisms, 2022, 10 (1), pp. 138. 10.3390/microorganisms10010138. [https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms10010138](https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms10010138). [hal-03593214](https:// HAL Id: )

Submitted on 3 Jan 2023

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>

Editorial

# Microbial Biofilms: Structural Plasticity and Emerging Properties

Arnaud Bridier<fnref n="1" />,* and Romain Briandet<fnref n="2" />,*

**Abstract:** Microbial biofilms are found everywhere and can be either beneficial or detrimental, as they are involved in crucial ecological processes and in severe chronic infections. The functional properties of biofilms are closely related to their three-dimensional (3D) structure, and the ability of microorganisms to collectively and dynamically shape the community spatial organization in response to stresses in such biological edifices. A large number of works have shown a relationship between the modulation of the spatial organization and ecological interactions in biofilms in response to environmental fluctuations, as well as their emerging properties essential for nutrient cycling and bioremediation processes in natural environments. On the contrary, numerous studies have emphasized the role of structural rearrangements and matrix production in the increased tolerance of bacteria in biofilms toward antimicrobials. In these last few years, the development of innovative approaches, relying on recent technological advances in imaging, computing capacity, and other analytical tools, has led to the production of original data that have improved our understanding of this close relationship. However, it has also highlighted the need to delve deeper into the study of cell behavior in such complex communities during 3D structure development and maturation— from a single-cell to a multicellular scale—to better control or harness positive and negative impacts of biofilms. For this Special Issue, the interplay between biofilm emerging properties and their 3D spatial organization considering different models, from single bacteria to complex environmental communities, and various environments, from natural ecosystems to industrial and medical settings are addressed.

**Keywords:** biofilm; multicellular community; microbial functions; 3D structure; fluorescence imaging; confocal microscopy; light-sheet microscopy; single cell; multiscale approach

## 1. A Three-Dimensional Lifestyle

Microbial biofilms constitute a communal way of life enabling microorganisms to colonize very diverse ecological niches over the Earth—from pristine ecosystems to anthropized environments [1]. They greatly affect human well-being through their involvement in numerous beneficial ecological cycles or biotechnological applications, as well as in deleterious chronic infections or biocorrosion processes for instance. In these biological buildings, microorganisms live in close proximity embedded in extracellular polymeric substances and mostly share specific emerging properties, behaving more than simple cellular aggregates. The extracellular matrix contains a complex panel of chemically diverse molecules with various roles in biofilm development, architecture, and functions, also termed the matrixome [2]. This matrixome is highly dependent on species diversity and environmental conditions in terms of composition [3,4]. It cements cells together and highly participates in the shaping and the plasticity of biofilm spatial organization, resulting in a great diversity of biofilm architectures [5,6]. Interestingly, the term “biofilm” was recently discussed, as it evokes only one shape of the various manifestations of microbial aggregates and

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /></figure>

check for
updates

**Citation:** Bridier, A.; Briandet, R.

Microbial Biofilms: Structural Plasticity and Emerging Properties.

*Microorganisms* **2022**, *10*, 138.

https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms10010138

Received: 5 January 2022

Accepted: 7 January 2022

Published: 10 January 2022

**Publisher's Note:** MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /></figure>

**Copyright:** © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

<footnote n="1">¹ Antibiotics, Biocides, Residues and Resistance Unit, Fougères Laboratory, French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety (ANSES), 35300 Fougères, France</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Micalis Institute, INRAE, AgroParisTech, Université Paris-Saclay, 78350 Jouy-en-Josas, France</footnote>

<footnote>* Correspondence: arnaud.bridier@anses.fr (A.B.); romain.briandet@inrae.fr (R.B.)</footnote>
insufficiently reflects the complex architectural features most observed and which are at the
origin of biofilm's emerging properties [1]. The production of the extracellular polymeric
matrix and the 3D expansion of biofilm indeed lead to heterogeneity of phenotypes due
to chemical gradients within the structure. This heterogeneity is considered a hallmark of
biofilms, along with a challenge to tackle to understand how specific functional properties
emerge [7]. Nevertheless, a large number of methodologies still commonly used in biofilm
studies provide only a global analysis of the whole biofilm and do not consider this spatial
heterogeneity [8]. Moreover, biofilms are mostly associations of a wide range of microorganisms
in natural and industrial environments, resulting in ecological diversity in addition to
phenotypic heterogeneity. The ecological interactions between species also play key roles
in the building of the biofilms 3D structure and functions. Structural organization between
species in biofilm indeed depends on both local interactions between species-specific physiology
and global environmental conditions. The multiscale analysis of biofilm organization
can thus be used to better decipher the nature of ecological interactions in mixed-species
communities and the underlying mechanisms [8–10]. In addition, some studies recently
demonstrated that growth in a 3D biofilm can promote genetic diversity and may drive
the evolution of mutualistic behavior, reciprocally affecting the biofilm architecture [11–13].
Overall, the close relationship between 3D structures and the adaptation of biofilm to
internal and environmental stresses articulates the emergence of functional properties and
finally drives their positive or negative impacts [14].

## 2. Advances in Biofilm 3D Characterization

In recent years, an increasing number of methodologies and approaches, supported
by technological progress in imaging, modeling, and computing sciences, led to advancing
further in the multiscale analysis and deciphering of the 3D structure of biofilms.

Confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) is an optical microscopy technique com-
bining a targeted laser excitation with a pinhole before detection, enabling it to collect
fluorescence from a distinct focus plane. Various fluorophores can additionally be used
simultaneously through multispectral acquisitions. For these reasons, CLSM was exten-
sively used to capture both quantitative and qualitative structural data in biofilm through
non-invasive 3D spatiotemporal analyses down to a single-cell scale [15,16]. The develop-
ment of high-throughput screening of biofilm 3D structures, combining microtiter plates
and an automatized scanning led to a dramatic increase in the number of samples studied
simultaneously, thus enabling large comparison of biofilms architecture and statistical
analyses [17]. Recently, light-sheet-based imaging also emerged as a successful method
to characterize biofilm 3D structure. An advantage of light-sheet-based microscopy ap-
proaches is their low photobleaching, compared with CLSM, due to the weaker illumination
intensity required [18]. This feature makes light-sheet microscopy (and especially dual-
view light-sheet microscopy) a suitable technique to map individual cell trajectories over
long durations within the biofilm and thus reveal the complex spatiotemporal dynamics of
development [19]. For instance, dual-view light-sheet microscopy was elegantly used in
combination with intracellular fluorescent puncta labeling and modeling to track single
bacteria during Vibrio cholerae 3D biofilm expansion and reveal spatiotemporal patterns
of development [20]. The authors highlighted the presence of two distinct cell behaviors
and a collective fountain-like flow of bacteria that together govern the development of
the multicellular structure. Advances in scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and the
development of techniques suitable for hydrated biofilm architectural investigation such
as variable pressure SEM (VP-SEM), environmental SEM (ESEM), and Ambiental SEM
(ASEM), and their combination with other microscopic approaches also led to advance
further in the exploration of biofilm ultrastructure and cell morphology or to compare the
effect of different treatments [21,22].

Regardless of the imaging technology used, our ability to analyze biofilm structural
dynamics at the single-cell scale has been greatly improved owing to the development
of automated image analysis and computational tools. In a recent review, Jeckel and
Drescher [23] discussed the opportunities given by recent improvements in segmentation and machine learning associated development, image cytometry, adaptive microscopy, high-dimensional data analysis, and overall image analysis methods, for the monitoring of spatiotemporal processes in microbial populations. Some image analysis tools and workflows specifically dedicated to biofilm 3D structure analysis and quantification, such as BCM3D or BiofilmQ, greatly participated in the increase in our capacities to decipher collective biofilm traits in space and time considering single-cell scale [24,25]. The development of computational methods and especially the application of artificial intelligence and machine learning to cutting-edge biofilm imaging data, and its integration with heterogeneous data such as large multi-omics datasets, for instance, provide an unprecedented opportunity to explore the link between the presence of complex structural patterns and functional properties in biofilms [26,27].

Major advances in the deciphering of biofilm development were indeed achieved
owing to such integrative approaches, particularly in our ability to consider the structural
heterogeneity of biofilm, which remains a major challenge to understand biofilm organiza-
tion and functions. The improvement of spectral imaging techniques, in association with a
highly multiplexed fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) approach, enabled the high-
phylogenetic-resolution mapping of microbial communities [28]. The recent adaptation and
application of mRNA labeling and sequential FISH (seqFISH) to bacterial populations pro-
vided access to single-cell transcriptional activities in *Pseudomonas aeruginosa* biofilms [29].
Microscale, spatial-resolved transcriptomics has indeed the potential to capture biofilm
spatial and temporal heterogeneity and could further be extended to explore sub-cellular
transcript organization in bacteria, and finally, delve deeper into biofilm-spatialized func-
tional organization [30]. Moreover, tools for spatially and temporally resolved analyses
of extracellular compartments of biofilms emerged. As an example, pH variation in envi-
ronmental microniches in *Pseudomonas aeruginosa* and *Streptococcus mutans* biofilms was
monitored in real time using pH-sensitive nanosensors. These fluorescent nanosensors
revealed pH gradients during the building of 3D structures that helped to better understand
the dynamic modulations of extracellular matrices during the developmental process and
to potentially identify targets for biofilm control [31].

Using an innovative experimental imaging and image analysis approach based on
confocal microscopy and new 3D-image segmentation techniques, Drescher et al. were
able to monitor and reconstruct 3D biofilm development in the pathogen *V. cholerae* at a
single-cell resolution, with up to 10,000 individuals [32]. From these observations, they
better predicted developmental dynamics and 3D structure emergence of biofilm through
a better deciphering of cellular interactions. Complementarily, by integrating rheological
measurements, single-cell imaging by spinning disc confocal microscopy, and modeling,
Zhang et al. [33] built a comprehensive view of *V. cholerae* biofilm development in confined
environments using an agarose gel entrapment model. Thereby, they demonstrated that
mechanical stress governs morphogenetic development and cell ordering in *V. cholerae*
confined biofilms. The association of an adaptive microscopy approach with machine
learning and modeling also permits the depiction of the multicellular behavior in the
*Bacillus subtilis* swarming model at different scales [34]. This led to a unified, multiscale
swarm expansion model, governed by cell-cell interactions, as well as by gene expression
at a microscopic scale and cellular growth kinetics at the macroscopic scale.

In conclusion, the central role of 3D structural rearrangements within microbial com-
munities in developmental strategies and functional properties underlines the need to
delve deeper into our understanding of underlying cellular dynamic processes in biofilms
at a multiscale level. Recent technological advances in single-cell imaging or pheno-
typic and genomic characterization methods, along with the development of modeling,
artificial-intelligence-based, and machine learning approaches provided promising insights
in this perspective, as illustrated here. Further studies and methodological development
in this field should thus lead to dramatically improving our understanding of biofilm
structure/function relationships in the near future.
**Author Contributions:** Both authors have made a substantial, direct, and intellectual contribution to the work and approved it for publication. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research received no external funding.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.

## References

1. Flemming, H.-C.; Baveye, P.; Neu, T.R.; Stoodley, P.; Szewzyk, U.; Wingender, J.; Wuertz, S. Who put the film in biofilm? The migration of a term from wastewater engineering to medicine and beyond. *NPJ Biofilms Microbiomes* **2021**, *7*, 10. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

2. Karygianni, L.; Ren, Z.; Koo, H.; Thurnheer, T. Biofilm Matrixome: Extracellular Components in Structured Microbial Communities. *Trends Microbiol. 2020*, *28*, 668–681. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

3. Guillonneau, R.; Baraquet, C.; Bazire, A.; Molmeret, M. Multispecies Biofilm Development of Marine Bacteria Implies Complex Relationships through Competition and Synergy and Modification of Matrix Components. *Front. Microbiol. 2018*, *9*, 1960. [CrossRef]

4. Wickramasinghe, N.N.; Hlaing, M.M.; Ravensdale, J.T.; Coorey, R.; Chandry, P.S.; Dykes, G.A. Characterization of the biofilm matrix composition of psychrotrophic, meat spoilage pseudomonads. *Sci. Rep.* **2020**, *10*, 16457. [CrossRef]

5. Bridier, A.; Dubois-Brissonnet, F.; Boubetra, A.; Thomas, V.; Briandet, R. The biofilm architecture of sixty opportunistic pathogens deciphered using a high throughput CLSM method. *J. Microbiol. Methods* **2010**, *82*, 64–70. [CrossRef]

6. Kowalski, C.H.; Morelli, K.A.; Schultz, D.; Nadell, C.D.; Cramer, R.A. Fungal biofilm architecture produces hypoxic microenvironments that drive antifungal resistance. *Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA* **2020**, *117*, 22473–22483. [CrossRef]

7. Beloin, C.; McDougald, D. Speciality Grand Challenge for “Biofilms”. *Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol.* **2021**, *11*, 632429. [CrossRef]

8. Røder, H.L.; Olsen, N.M.C.; Whiteley, M.; Burmølle, M. Unravelling interspecies interactions across heterogeneities in complex biofilm communities. *Environ. Microbiol.* **2020**, *22*, 5–16. [CrossRef]

9. Bridier, A.; Briandet, R.; Bouchez, T.; Jabot, F. A model-based approach to detect interspecific interactions during biofilm development. *Biofouling* **2014**, *30*, 761–771. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

10. Booth, S.C.; Rice, S.A. Influence of interspecies interactions on the spatial organization of dual species bacterial communities. *Biofilm* **2020**, *2*, 100035. [CrossRef]

11. France, M.T.; Cornea, A.; Kehlet-Delgado, H.; Forney, L.J. Spatial structure facilitates the accumulation and persistence of antibiotic-resistant mutants in biofilms. *Evol. Appl.* **2020**, *12*, 498–507. [CrossRef]

12. Bridier, A.; Piard, J.C.; Briandet, R.; Bouchez, T. Emergence of a Synergistic Diversity as a Response to Competition in Pseudomonas putida Biofilms. *Microb. Ecol.* **2019**, *80*, 47–59. [CrossRef]

13. Arjes, H.A.; Willis, L.; Gui, H.; Xiao, Y.; Peters, J.; Gross, C.; Huang, K.C. Three-dimensional biofilm colony growth supports a mutualism involving matrix and nutrient sharing. *eLife* **2021**, *10*, 64145. [CrossRef]

14. Bridier, A.; Piard, J.-C.; Pandin, C.; Labarthe, S.; Dubois-Brissonnet, F.; Briandet, R. Spatial Organization Plasticity as an Adaptive Driver of Surface Microbial Communities. *Front. Microbiol.* **2017**, *8*, 1364. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

15. Bridier, A.; Briandet, R. Contribution of Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy in Deciphering Biofilm Tridimensional Structure and Reactivity. *Methods Mol. Biol. Clifton NJ* **2014**, *1147*, 255–266. [CrossRef]

16. Reichhardt, C.; Parsek, M.R. Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy for Analysis of Pseudomonas aeruginosa Biofilm Architecture and Matrix Localization. *Front. Microbiol.* **2019**, *10*, 677. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

17. Canette, A.; Deschamps, J.; Briandet, R. High Content Screening Confocal Laser Microscopy (HCS-CLM) to Characterize Biofilm 4D Structural Dynamic of Foodborne Pathogens. *Methods Mol. Biol. Clifton NJ* **2019**, *1918*, 171–182. [CrossRef]

18. Parthasarathy, R. Monitoring microbial communities using light sheet fluorescence microscopy. *Curr. Opin. Microbiol.* **2018**, *43*, 31–37. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

19. Letham, S.C.; Bharat, T.A.M. Illuminating the dynamics of biofilms. *Nat. Rev. Microbiol.* **2020**, *18*, 544. [CrossRef]

20. Qin, B.; Fei, C.; Bridges, A.A.; Mashruwala, A.A.; Stone, H.A.; Wingreen, N.S.; Bassler, B.L. Cell position fates and collective fountain flow in bacterial biofilms revealed by light-sheet microscopy. *Science* **2020**, *369*, 71–77. [CrossRef]

21. Bridier, A.; Meylheuc, T.; Briandet, R. Realistic representation of Bacillus subtilis biofilms architecture using combined microscopy (CLSM, ESEM and FESEM). *Micron* **2013**, *48*, 65–69. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

22. Relucenti, M.; Familiari, G.; Donfrancesco, O.; Taurino, M.; Li, X.; Chen, R.; Artini, M.; Papa, R.; Selan, L. Microscopy Methods for Biofilm Imaging: Focus on SEM and VP-SEM Pros and Cons. *Biology* **2021**, *10*, 51. [CrossRef]

23. Jeckel, H.; Drescher, K. Advances and opportunities in image analysis of bacterial cells and communities. *FEMS Microbiol. Rev.* **2021**, *45*, fuaa062. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

24. Zhang, M.; Zhang, J.; Wang, Y.; Wang, J.; Achimovich, A.M.; Acton, S.T.; Gahlmann, A. Non-invasive single-cell morphometry in living bacterial biofilms. *Nat. Commun.* **2020**, *11*, 6151. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

25. Hartmann, R.; Jeckel, H.; Jelli, E.; Singh, P.K.; Vaidya, S.; Bayer, M.; Rode, D.K.H.; Vidakovic, L.; Díaz-Pascual, F.; Fong, J.C.N.; et al. Quantitative image analysis of microbial communities with BiofilmQ. *Nat. Microbiol.* **2021**, *6*, 151–156. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
26. Coenye, T.; Kjellerup, B.; Stoodley, P.; Bjarnsholt, T. The future of biofilm research—Report on the '2019 Biofilm Bash'. *Biofilm* **2020**, *2*, 100012. [CrossRef]

27. An, A.Y.; Choi, K.-Y.G.; Baghela, A.S.; Hancock, R.E.W. An Overview of Biological and Computational Methods for Designing Mechanism-Informed Anti-biofilm Agents. *Front. Microbiol.* **2021**, *12*, 640787. [CrossRef]

28. Shi, H.; Shi, Q.; Grodner, B.; Lenz, J.S.; Zipfel, W.; Brito, I.L.; De Vlaminck, I. Highly multiplexed spatial mapping of microbial communities. *Nature* **2020**, *588*, 676–681. [CrossRef]

29. Dar, D.; Dar, N.; Cai, L.; Newman, D.K. Spatial transcriptomics of planktonic and sessile bacterial populations at single-cell resolution. *Science* **2021**, *373*, eabi4882. [CrossRef]

30. Sanchez-Vizuete, P.; Dergham, Y.; Bridier, A.; Deschamps, J.; Dervyn, E.; Hamze, K.; Aymerich, S.; Le Coq, D.; Briandet, R. The coordinated population redistribution between Bacillus subtilis submerged biofilm and liquid-air pellicle. *Biofilm* **2022**, *4*, 100065. [CrossRef]

31. Hollmann, B.; Perkins, M.; Chauhan, V.M.; Aylott, J.W.; Hardie, K.R. Fluorescent nanosensors reveal dynamic pH gradients during biofilm formation. *NPJ Biofilms Microbiomes* **2021**, *7*, 50. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

32. Hartmann, R.; Singh, P.K.; Pearce, P.; Mok, R.; Song, B.; Díaz-Pascual, F.; Dunkel, J.; Drescher, K. Emergence of three-dimensional order and structure in growing biofilms. *Nat. Phys.* **2019**, *15*, 251–256. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

33. Zhang, Q.; Li, J.; Nijjer, J.; Lu, H.; Kothari, M.; Alert, R.; Cohen, T.; Yan, J. Morphogenesis and cell ordering in confined bacterial biofilms. *Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA* **2021**, *118*, e2107107118. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

34. Jeckel, H.; Jelli, E.; Hartmann, R.; Singh, P.K.; Mok, R.; Totz, J.F.; Vidakovic, L.; Eckhardt, B.; Dunkel, J.; Drescher, K. Learning the space-time phase diagram of bacterial swarm expansion. *Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA* **2019**, *116*, 1489–1494. [CrossRef] [PubMed]