TU Delft

Biofilm control strategies based on the induced disruption of the EPS matrix - a modelling study

Links to animations concerning all the simulations analysed in the article "Biofilm control strategies based on the induced disruption of the EPS matrix - a modelling study" are provided here.

Simulations for the undisturbed biofilm growth

Four replicate simulations carried out corresponding to 100 days of undisturbed biofilm growth. Simulations used the same set of parameters with exception of the seed for the random number generator.

Simulation Quick Time movie
Replicate U1 control_rd_1.0E-4_cS_0.0010_
seed_101_lowres.mov
Replicate U2 control_rd_1.0E-4_cS_0.0010_
seed_102_lowres.mov
Replicate U3 control_rd_1.0E-4_cS_0.0010_
seed_103_lowres.mov
Replicate U4 control_rd_1.0E-4_cS_0.0010_
seed_104_lowres.mov

Simulations carried out with YEPS* = 1

Simulations of the biofilm being removed in the presence of a PDP (detachment promoting agent). Simulations carried out for diverse values of the Thiele modulus and Damk÷hler number, which quantify the penetration of the PDP into the biofilm and the rate of the EPS reaction relative to the rate of EPS production.

Simulation Thiele modulus Damk÷hler number Quick Time movie
T1 3.6 0.36 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_50.0_kdecPDP_1.0_YEPSstar_1.0.MOV
T2 6.2 0.36 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_50.0_kdecPDP_3.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T3 8.0 0.36 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_50.0_kdecPDP_5.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T4 10.1 0.36 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_50.0_kdecPDP_8.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T5 11.3 0.36 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_50.0_kdecPDP_10.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T6 3.6 0.71 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_100.0_kdecPDP_1.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T7 6.2 0.71 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_100.0_kdecPDP_3.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T8 8.0 0.71 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_100.0_kdecPDP_5.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T9 10.1 0.71 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_100.0_kdecPDP_8.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T10 11.3 0.71 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_100.0_kdecPDP_10.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T11 3.6 3.57 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_500.0_kdecPDP_1.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T12 6.2 3.57 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_500.0_kdecPDP_3.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T13 8.0 3.57 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_500.0_kdecPDP_5.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T14 10.1 3.57 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_500.0_kdecPDP_8.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T15 11.3 3.57 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_500.0_kdecPDP_10.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T16 3.6 5.36 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_750.0_kdecPDP_1.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T17 6.2 5.36 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_750.0_kdecPDP_3.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T18 8.0 5.36 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_750.0_kdecPDP_5.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T19 10.1 5.36 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_750.0_kdecPDP_8.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T20 11.3 5.36 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_750.0_kdecPDP_10.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T21 3.6 7.14 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_1000.0_kdecPDP_1.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T22 6.2 7.14 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_1000.0_kdecPDP_3.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T23 8.0 7.14 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_1000.0_kdecPDP_5.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T24 10.1 7.14 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_1000.0_kdecPDP_8.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T25 11.3 7.14 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_1000.0_kdecPDP_10.0_YEPSstar_1.0.mov

Simulations carried out with variable YEPS*

These simulations also show the biofilm being removed in the presence of a DPA (detachment promoting agent), but these were carried out for diverse values of YEPS*. Values for the Thiele modulus and Damk÷hler number where set at 3.6 and 0.71, respectivelly. Simulation carried out with YEPS* = 1 is simulation T6 shown above.

Simulation YEPS* Quick Time movie
T26 0.1 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_100.0_kdecPDP_1.0_YEPSstar_0.1.mov
T27 0.01 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_100.0_kdecPDP_1.0_YEPSstar_0.01.mov
T28 0 CaseStudy2_kdecEPS_100.0_kdecPDP_1.0_YEPSstar_0.0.mov

Simulations for the case where the DPA is involved in a stoichiometric reaction with the EPS

These simulations show the biofilm being removed in the presence of a DPA (detachment promoting agent) for the case where the DPA is involved in a stoichiometric reaction with the EPS. Values for the the Damk÷hler number and YEPS* where set at 0.71 and 1, respectivelly. Simulations shown represent treatments with variable DPA penetration, as quantified by an alternate Thiele modulus (defined in equation 20 in the article).

Simulation Thiele modulus Quick Time movie
T29 3.6 Stoichiometric_kdecEPS_100.0_YPDP_0.01_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T30 6.2 Stoichiometric_kdecEPS_100.0_YPDP_0.1_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T31 11.3 Stoichiometric_kdecEPS_100.0_YPDP_0.2_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T32 13.9 Stoichiometric_kdecEPS_100.0_YPDP_0.03_YEPSstar_1.0.mov
T33 16.0 Stoichiometric_kdecEPS_100.0_YPDP_0.15_YEPSstar_1.0.mov

The effect of gamma on biofilm removal

These simulations where caried out using values for gamma ranging from 0.2 to 10. Gamma is the order of the dependence of biofilm cohesiveness on the fraction fEPS (through equation 15 shown in the article). Values for the the Damk÷hler number, Thiele modulus and YEPS* where set at 0.71, 3.6 and 1 respectivelly.

Simulation Gamma Quick Time movie
T34 10 GammaEffect_gamma_10.0.mov
T35 8 GammaEffect_gamma_8.0.mov
T36 6 GammaEffect_gamma_6.0.mov
T37 4 GammaEffect_gamma_4.0.mov
T38 2 GammaEffect_gamma_2.0.mov
T39 1 GammaEffect_gamma_1.0.mov
T40 0.8 GammaEffect_gamma_0.8.mov
T41 0.6 GammaEffect_gamma_0.6.mov
T42 0.4 GammaEffect_gamma_0.4.mov
T43 0.2 GammaEffect_gamma_0.2.mov

Back to:

Support material for "Biofilm control strategies based on the induced disruption of the EPS matrix - a modelling study"


2005 - Biofilm modelling group at the TU Delft