Such infections often persist despite aggressive antimicrobial therapy and intact immunity. Abolition of the biofilm by removal of the object on which it has formed, mechanical debridement or aggressive antimicrobial use is key to resolving biofilm-related www.selleckchem.com/products/gsk-j4-hcl.html infections. However, each treatment regime

is challenging and frequently results in poor bacterial clearance that leads to reinfection or other major sequelae. While bench experimentation has answered many questions about biofilms, such microbial communities are exceptional candidates for the application of mathematical modeling (Fig. 1). In fact, numerous recent efforts have encompassed mathematical models in biofilm studies (Dodds et al., 2000; Dockery & Keener, 2001; Klapper et al., 2002; Anguige et al., 2004; Balaban et al., 2004; Kreft, 2004; Imran & Smith, 2007; Cogan, 2008; Eberl & Sudarsan, 2008). In some of these, biofilm models are presented that require nutrient cycling, are subjected to sheer forces, form on a variety of matrices, Ku-0059436 datasheet and are dynamic with organisms joining and exiting the biofilms. Models that probe molecular mechanisms underlying persistence are also of

significant interest. These linked phenomena are applicable to mathematical models because they allow testing of hypothesis concerning environmental variables and can direct new experimental efforts: a means to connect the different processes and to weigh their relative contributions. To address unresolved issues and current research on biofilms and the mathematical modeling thereof, a workshop was held March 22–25, 2010 on the Ohio Dipeptidyl peptidase State University (OSU) campus led by the OSU Mathematical Biosciences Institute in collaboration with the OSU Medical School. This workshop aimed to bring together modelers with bench scientists and clinicians working on biofilm-involved human infections. All sides benefited dramatically from obtaining a better understanding of each other’s expertise, approaches, and research directions, with the expected result of new research collaborations. Here, we will address some of the current topics in modeling and

bench biofilm research, strengths and weaknesses of each camp, and new directions of potential collaborative efforts and needs within the field. This section is not meant to be a comprehensive review of the state of mathematical modeling of biofilms or the biological experiments that lead to these models. A thorough review of the mathematical contributions has recently appeared (Klapper & Dockery, 2010). Moreover, this section is not meant to bridge the mathematical gap between what is often termed bioinformatics and mathematical biology. Many of the experimental insights and questions commonly discussed seem to lie predominately in the former domain, while many of the active ‘modelers’ lie in the latter domain.