Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 68 references

Shape-asymmetry and flexibility in active cross-stream migration in nonuniform shear

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A head-tail asymmetric microswimmer in a purely viscous channel flow migrates toward the walls because its shape makes it spend more time pointing toward the wall than toward the center.

desk verdict A clean mechanistic result on how head-tail asymmetry in a model flagellated swimmer produces cross-stream migration; the main open question is whether the straight-rod flagellum is generic. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.04316 v2 pith:KHTNRW7I submitted 2025-02-06 cond-mat.soft physics.bio-ph

Derek C. Gomes , Tapan C. Adhyapak This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.softphysics.bio-ph
keywords microswimmercross-streammigrationhead-tailasymmetryflagellarflexibilityPoiseuilleflowlowReynoldsnumberactivematterlimitcycle
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper establishes that a microswimmer with broken head-tail symmetry migrates across streamlines in a purely viscous channel flow, without needing inertia, viscoelasticity, or walls. The mechanism is that the asymmetric shape makes the swimmer rotate faster when pointing toward the channel center than toward the wall, so it spends more time pointing toward the wall and is carried there by its own propulsion. Using a minimal model of a spherical body with a flexible flagellar rod, the authors solve the low-Reynolds-number hydrodynamics self-consistently and show that most such swimmers reach the channel walls, while a small central population near an unstable limit cycle stays trapped at the midsection and is flushed out. Flagellar flexibility accelerates the wall migration and, past a critical stiffness, eliminates the trapped population entirely. The result matters because most real microswimmers are head-tail asymmetric, so cross-stream migration should be common in microchannels rather than an exotic effect.

What carries the argument

The key object is the rotation-rate equation for the orientation angle $\theta$: $\dot{\theta} = (v_f/R^2)(\alpha y + 2\beta_2 \sin^2\theta \, y + \beta_1 \sin\theta + \beta_3 \sin^3\theta)$, where $y$ is the swimmer's vertical position in the channel and the constants $\beta_1$, $\beta_3$ and the hydrodynamic-center shift $r_{\text{sh}}$ are nonzero only when head-tail symmetry is broken. The $\sin\theta$ and $\sin^3\theta$ terms make the swimmer rotate at different average rates when it points toward the wall than toward the center, and this asymmetry, combined with self-propulsion at speed $v_{\text{sp}}$, produces the vertical drift in Eq. (5). The second central object is the van der Pol-like amplitude equation $\ddot{\psi} + \mu_1(1-\zeta\psi^2)\dot{\psi} + k_1\psi = -\mu_3\psi\dot{\psi}^2 - k_3\psi^3$ obtained by linearizing around the fixed point $(0,\pi)$; its unstable fixed point at amplitude $\psi^a_{\text{LC}}$ corresponds to the unstable limit cycle that bounds the center-trapped region.

What would settle it

In a microchannel Poiseuille flow at low Reynolds number and far from walls, track the orientation angle $\theta(t)$ of a head-tail-asymmetric swimmer (e.g., an engineered colloid with a rigid asymmetric appendage) over many oscillation periods; if the time it spends pointing toward the wall does not exceed the time it spends pointing toward the channel center, the predicted wall-directed drift cannot occur, and the central mechanism is refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that head-tail shape-asymmetry is a fundamental driver of active cross-streaming in channel flows. In the model, a pusher with a rigid flagellum in Poiseuille flow shows three trajectory classes: swimmers starting far from the center oscillate toward the nearest wall; those starting at intermediate heights are temporarily trapped at the midsection and then escape to a wall; and those below a height $y_{\max}$ oscillate with decaying amplitude and remain trapped at the channel center indefinitely. The phase space is organized by an unstable limit cycle that separates the trapped and escaping populations. The underlying mechanism is the asymmetric rotation rate: the swimmer spends a larger fraction of each oscillation period pointing toward the wall, so its self-propulsion produces a net drift toward the wall. The simplified dynamics reduce to a van der Pol-like oscillator around the stable fixed point $(y,\theta)=(0,\pi)$, with the asymmetry entering through coefficients $\beta_1$, $\beta_3$ and the hydrodynamic-center shift $r_{\text{sh}}$. Flagellar flexibility increases the average rotation rate, and at a critical rigidity $k_c$ the limit cycle collapses in a subcritical Hopf bifurcation.

Load-bearing premise

The flagellar bundle is modeled as a single slender rod pinned at one point, bending by one angle $\phi$ with a linear elastic torque and constant active force, so the predicted drift and limit-cycle structure all rest on the assumption that this minimal rod captures the essential shape asymmetry of a real flagellum.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In a mixed population with varying flagellar stiffness, more flexible swimmers reach the walls faster while rigid ones remain center-trapped, so the channel flow can sort swimmers by flexibility.
  • Tuning the maximum flow speed $v_f$ adjusts the size of the unstable limit cycle and thereby the fraction of the population flushed through the channel center, up to about 10% for a rigid-swimmer population.
  • For pullers, the limit cycle is stable instead of unstable, so trajectories inside it grow in amplitude and escape the center, the opposite of the pusher case.
  • The dynamics depend on the channel geometry only through the ratio $v_f/R^2$; trajectories overlap in the $y$-$\theta$ plane for different $R$ and $v_f$ with the same ratio, indicating an invariant limit-cycle size.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • We infer that head-tail asymmetry may be the dominant cross-stream migration mechanism for bacteria-sized swimmers in typical microchannels, since it operates in a purely Newtonian fluid and requires no external fields or wall contact.
  • A testable extension would be to measure the rotation-rate asymmetry directly: in a linear shear flow, an asymmetric swimmer should show unequal average $\dot{\theta}$ for wall-facing versus center-facing orientations, and the difference should scale with the shear rate.
  • The model's minimal flagellum suggests that in real flagellated bacteria, the helical shape and distributed flexibility could shift the critical stiffness $k_c$ and the size of the trapped population, but the qualitative phase-space structure (unstable limit cycle, center attractor) should survive.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents a numerical and analytical study of a model flagellated microswimmer—a spherical body with a slender-rod flagellum that can bend at a single hinge—in a pressure-driven Poiseuille flow. Solving the Stokes-flow force and torque balance with image singularities, the authors find that head-tail asymmetric swimmers exhibit three dynamical classes: migration to the walls, escape from the mid-channel region, and indefinite trapping near the mid-channel, depending on initial conditions. A reduced two-variable model (Eqs. (5)–(6)) introduces coefficients β1, β3, and r_sh that parameterize the fore-aft asymmetry, and a van der Pol-type amplitude equation (Eq. (7)) predicts an unstable limit cycle whose stable counterpart traps a population near the center. The authors argue that the asymmetry-induced nonuniform rotation rate, combined with self-propulsion, drives cross-stream migration.

Significance. If the mechanism is generic, this is a significant advance: it identifies a purely viscous, inertialess cross-stream migration mechanism for active particles, distinct from inertia, viscoelasticity, or wall repulsion, and it suggests a practical way to sort swimmers by flagellar flexibility. The paper's strengths are the fully resolved hydrodynamics, the explicit reduced theory with a phase-space explanation, and the comparison with existing experimental parameters in Appendix C showing where HTA effects should have been visible. The central predictions—wall-directed migration, a center-trapped population, and a flexibility-dependent limit cycle—are falsifiable.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2, after Eq. (4); Eq. (6)] The manuscript's generalized conclusion that 'head-tail shape-asymmetry fundamentally drives active cross-streaming' is tested only for a single geometric model: a straight slender rod hinged at one angle. Since all fore-aft asymmetry enters through β1, β3, and r_sh in Eqs. (5)–(6), and these vanish in the ℓf→0 limit, the straight-rod ansatz is the exclusive source of the predicted migration. To rule out that the rotation-rate asymmetry is an artifact of the straight-rod representation, the authors should either compute the same coefficients for a helical (chiral, distributed-flexibility) flagellum or for a different HTA shape (e.g., a two-sphere swimmer) and show that the sign of β1/β3 is shape-independent, or soften the claim to 'this minimal rod model'.
  2. [Fig. A1(a) and Appendix B] The quantitative validation of the reduced theory is weakened by the use of simulation-derived normalizations. The analytical trajectory is plotted as y/y_LC^π with y_LC^π taken from the simulation, so the absolute amplitude of the oscillation is not predicted but matched. Similarly, the 10% 'trapped fraction' estimate in Appendix B uses the limit-cycle dimensions a_max and b_max measured from Fig. A1(c). The paper should either derive y_LC^π from the theory (e.g., via the LC ellipse formula) or clearly state that the theory predicts only the relative dynamics.
  3. [Eqs. (5)–(7) and Supplemental Material] The coefficients β1, β3 and the reduced coefficients μ1, μ3, k1, k3 are essential to the mechanism, but their derivations are relegated to Supplemental Material [51] and were not available for review. The sign of β1 determines the direction of migration, and Eq. (7) is asserted to follow from eliminating y from Eq. (6) without showing the algebra. For the central claim to be checkable, these derivations must be included in the supplement and made available.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (6)] The sentence 'the shape-HT symmetry is purely broken by the β1 and β3 terms alone' is confusing because r_sh in Eq. (5) is also zero for HTS swimmers; please clarify that the statement refers to the θ̇ equation.
  2. [Appendix A, Eq. (A4)] The expression for ψ_a(t) is missing a closing parenthesis in the denominator; please correct the typesetting.
  3. [References, item [51]] The text refers to 'the other coefficients are listed in [51]', but the Supplemental Material was not provided with this version; please ensure it is submitted with the revision.
  4. [Fig. 2(c)] The unstable limit cycle (orange) is difficult to distinguish from the separatrix (gray) in the printed figure; using different line styles or colors would improve readability.
  5. [Fig. 2(b) caption] The inset labels (Panel-1, Panel-2, Panel-3) are not defined in the caption; please add a short description of each class.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the migration mechanism is derived from Stokes-flow force/torque balance, not fitted to the predicted outcome.

full rationale

The central reduced equations (5) and (6) are obtained from the stated overdamped force/torque balances and slender-rod hydrodynamic couplings, with coefficients beta1, beta3, and r_sh collected in the Supplemental Material and recovered to zero in the HTS limit (ell_f -> 0). These are derived model outputs, not parameters fitted to the migration that is then 'predicted'. The claim that HTA breaks symmetry through beta1 and beta3 is a structural property of the model, and the HTS limit provides an independent control. Self-citations [34, 52, 62] are used for parameter values and technical results, not to establish the migration mechanism; no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is smuggled in via citation. The two quantitative comparisons that could raise concern are transparent calibrations rather than circular reductions. In Fig. A1(a), the analytical trajectory is normalized by the simulated y_LC^pi, and the paper explicitly says 'The normalization factor y_LC^pi = y(pi)|LC accounts for variations in yLC with and without self-induced active flows'; this sets an overall scale but does not determine the trajectory shape, phase, migration direction, or limit-cycle stability. In Appendix B, the 10% flushed-population estimate uses 'a and b measured from A1(c)', i.e., elliptic axes of the simulated limit cycle; this is a simulation-based estimate, not an independent first-principles prediction, and it is not load-bearing for the paper's main qualitative conclusions. The external comparisons in Appendix C are qualitative consistency checks and are not used as inputs to construct the reduced theory. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained and no load-bearing step reduces to its own inputs; the paper therefore receives a circularity score of 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard Stokesian hydrodynamics plus a minimal flagellar model. The primary modeling assumptions are the slender-rod representation of the flagellum with a single bend angle and constant active force; these are ad hoc simplifications that generate the beta1, beta3 and r_sh terms. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (6)
  • Active force F_sp = adjusted so that vs = 50 um/s
    The propulsion force is not measured but chosen so the model swimmer's speed matches a typical bacterial swimming speed; the migration rate depends on this choice.
  • Flagellar bending rigidity k = 2, 5, 20 pN-um (plus critical k_c)
    Swept by hand to represent flexible, intermediate, and rigid bundles; the limit cycle structure and migration rate depend strongly on k, so these values are inputs rather than external outputs.
  • Cell body radius a and flagellum length l_f = a = 1 um, l_f = 5a
    Taken from typical flagellated bacteria; the shape-asymmetry terms scale with l_f, so the choice matters for the quantitative predictions.
  • Channel half-width R and maximum flow speed v_f = R = 50 um, v_f = 500 um/s
    Standard microchannel values; the reduced dynamics depend only on v_f/R^2, so the qualitative results are robust but the quantitative rates are sensitive to these values.
  • Trajectory normalization factor y_LC^pi = set to simulated limit cycle height
    In Appendix A, the analytic y(x) is normalized by the simulated LC height to obtain overlap; this is a post hoc scaling of the theory.
  • Limit cycle dimensions a_max and b_max = a_max = R, b_max = 0.13 pi
    In Appendix B, the LC area used for the 10% flushed-fraction estimate is read off the simulated LC (Fig. A1c), not predicted from the theory.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Stokes flow and overdamped low-Reynolds-number dynamics govern the swimmer motion.
    The force and torque balances in Eqs. (1)-(2) assume Re << 1; the paper cites Ref. [47] for overdamped colloidal dynamics.
  • domain assumption Slender-body resistive force theory with a resistivity tensor captures flagellar drag.
    Eqs. (3)-(4) use the resistive force theory of Refs. [48-50]; this is a standard approximation for thin rods at low Reynolds number.
  • ad hoc to paper The flagellar bundle can be represented by a single bend angle phi with a linear elastic torque.
    The model description defines T_el^f = -k phi tau-hat and treats the rod as bending at one joint; the claimed asymmetry terms beta1 and beta3 arise from this minimal representation, which is a deliberate simplification of real helical flagella.
  • domain assumption At high Peclet number, deterministic in-plane dynamics in the xy plane suffice.
    The paper states 'we assume an in-plane orientation for simplicity', citing shear-induced alignment; out-of-plane dynamics and translational diffusion are neglected.
  • ad hoc to paper The swimmer maintains constant active force F_sp while flexibility varies.
    The paper models 'constant activity' from Ref. [5] by fixing F_sp; in real flagellated bacteria the motor torque, not the force, is often considered constant, so this choice affects how flexibility changes swimming speed.
  • domain assumption The flow reflected off the cell body is captured by image singularities satisfying the stick boundary condition, while channel walls produce no additional hydrodynamic interaction.
    The flow decomposition in 'Finely resolved hydrodynamics' includes images for the sphere but not for the confining walls; near-wall predictions therefore exclude wall-induced drag and lubrication.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Shape-asymmetry and flexibility in active cross-stream migration in nonuniform shear." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KHTNRW7I

@misc{pith2026250204316,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Shape-asymmetry and flexibility in active cross-stream migration in nonuniform shear},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KHTNRW7I}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.04316}
}
read the original abstract

We show that activity and broken fore-aft shape symmetry enable microswimmers to cross streamlines in nonuniform shear, a key yet overlooked factor in active cross-stream migration. Using a model of flagellated microswimmers in microchannel flow, we find that hydrodynamic coupling and flagellar flexibility significantly impact migration. A simplified theory identifies key factors driving the underlying rich nonlinear dynamics. Our findings apply to dynamics and control of both living and artificial microswimmers, while the hydrodynamic framework extends to diverse shear flow scenarios.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.04316 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) A model microswimmer with broken head-tail [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (a) The intrinsic flow field of our model microswimmer for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (a) Schematic of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 66 canonical work pages

  1. [51]

    [47, 50, 61–65]

    See Supplemental Material at [] which includes Refs. [47, 50, 61–65]. It contains the calculations of the flow field of our model swimmer and its velocities, coefficients used in the simplified analytical descriptions, and a com- parison of our results with parameters related to relevant experiments

    work page

  2. [1]

    Saintillan, Rheology of active fluids, Annu

    D. Saintillan, Rheology of active fluids, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 50, 563 (2018)

    work page 2018

  3. [2]

    Speck, Collective behavior of active brownian parti- cles: From microscopic clustering to macroscopic phase separation, Eur

    T. Speck, Collective behavior of active brownian parti- cles: From microscopic clustering to macroscopic phase separation, Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top. 225, 2287 (2016)

    work page 2016

  4. [3]

    A. G. Bayram, F. J. Schwarzendahl, H. L¨ owen, and L. Biancofiore, Motility-induced shear thickening in dense colloidal suspensions, Soft Matter 19, 4571 (2023)

    work page 2023

  5. [4]

    Daddi-Moussa-Ider and A

    A. Daddi-Moussa-Ider and A. M. Menzel, Dynamics of a simple model microswimmer in an anisotropic fluid: Implications for alignment behavior and active transport in a nematic liquid crystal, Phys. Rev. Fluids 3, 094102 (2018)

    work page 2018

  6. [5]

    M. C. Marchetti, J. F. Joanny, S. Ramaswamy, T. B. Liverpool, J. Prost, M. Rao, and R. A. Simha, Hydrody- namics of soft active matter, Rev. Mod. Phys. 85, 1143 (2013)

    2013

  7. [6]

    Lushi, H

    E. Lushi, H. Wioland, and R. E. Goldstein, Fluid flows created by swimming bacteria drive self-organization in confined suspensions, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 111, 9733 (2014)

    work page 2014

  8. [7]

    H. M. L´ opez, J. Gachelin, C. Douarche, H. Auradou, and E. Cl´ ement, Turning bacteria suspensions into superflu- ids, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 028301 (2015)

    work page 2015

Show all 68 references
  1. [8]

    For rigid and symmetric particles, the coupling to ex- ternal flows is through the flow vorticity and Fax´ en’s theorem, or its extended version [60], which simply uses derivatives evaluated at the particle centers

  2. [9]

    Zilman, J

    G. Zilman, J. Novak, and Y. Benayahu, How do larvae attach to a solid in a laminar flow?, Marine Biology 154, 1 (2008)

    2008

  3. [10]

    Z¨ ottl and H

    A. Z¨ ottl and H. Stark, Nonlinear dynamics of a mi- croswimmer in poiseuille flow, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 218104 (2012)

    2012

  4. [11]

    Garcia, S

    X. Garcia, S. Rafa ¨ ı, and P. Peyla, Light control of the flow of phototactic microswimmer suspensions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 138106 (2013)

    2013

  5. [12]

    Z¨ ottl and H

    A. Z¨ ottl and H. Stark, Periodic and quasiperiodic motion of an elongated microswimmer in poiseuille flow, Eur. Phys. J. E 36, 1 (2013)

    2013

  6. [13]

    Chac´ on, Chaotic dynamics of a microswimmer in poiseuille flow, Phys

    R. Chac´ on, Chaotic dynamics of a microswimmer in poiseuille flow, Phys. Rev. E 88, 052905 (2013)

    2013

  7. [14]

    C. Chen, S. Liu, X.-q. Shi, H. Chat´ e, and Y. Wu, Weak synchronization and large-scale collective oscillation in dense bacterial suspensions, Nature (London) 542, 210 (2017)

    2017

  8. [15]

    Nishiguchi, K

    D. Nishiguchi, K. H. Nagai, H. Chat´ e, and M. Sano, Long-range nematic order and anomalous fluctuations in suspensions of swimming filamentous bacteria, Phys. Rev. E 95, 020601 (2017)

    2017

  9. [16]

    Schwarz-Linek, J

    J. Schwarz-Linek, J. Arlt, A. Jepson, A. Dawson, T. Vis- sers, D. Miroli, T. Pilizota, V. A. Martinez, and W. C. Poon, Escherichia coli as a model active colloid: A prac- tical introduction, Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces 137, 2 (2016)

    2016

  10. [17]

    Be’er, B

    A. Be’er, B. Ilkanaiv, R. Gross, D. B. Kearns, S. Heiden- reich, M. B¨ ar, and G. Ariel, A phase diagram for bacterial swarming, Commun. Phys. 3, 66 (2020)

    2020

  11. [18]

    A. I. Curatolo, N. Zhou, Y. Zhao, C. Liu, A. Daerr, J. Tailleur, and J. Huang, Cooperative pattern formation in multi-component bacterial systems through reciprocal motility regulation, Nat. Phys. 16, 1152 (2020)

    2020

  12. [19]

    Grobas, M

    I. Grobas, M. Polin, and M. Asally, Swarming bacte- ria undergo localized dynamic phase transition to form stress-induced biofilms, eLife 10, e62632 (2021)

    2021

  13. [20]

    S. Liu, Y. Li, H. Xu, D. B. Kearns, and Y. Wu, Active in- terface bulging in Bacillus subtilis swarms promotes self- assembly and biofilm formation, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 121, e2322025121 (2024)

    2024

  14. [21]

    Sorkin, A

    B. Sorkin, A. Be’er, H. Diamant, and G. Ariel, Detect- ing and characterizing phase transitions in active matter using entropy, Soft Matter 19, 5118 (2023)

    2023

  15. [22]

    Dreyfus, J

    R. Dreyfus, J. Baudry, M. L. Roper, M. Fermigier, H. A. Stone, and J. Bibette, Microscopic artificial swimmers, Nature (London) 437, 862 (2005)

    2005

  16. [23]

    J. R. Howse, R. A. L. Jones, A. J. Ryan, T. Gough, R. Vafabakhsh, and R. Golestanian, Self-motile colloidal particles: From directed propulsion to random walk, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 048102 (2007)

    2007

  17. [24]

    W. F. Paxton, K. C. Kistler, C. C. Olmeda, A. Sen, S. K. St. Angelo, Y. Cao, T. E. Mallouk, P. E. Lammert, and V. H. Crespi, Catalytic nanomotors: Autonomous move- ment of striped nanorods, J. Am. Chem. Soc 126, 13424 (2004)

    2004

  18. [25]

    Palacci, S

    J. Palacci, S. Sacanna, A. P. Steinberg, D. J. Pine, and P. M. Chaikin, Living crystals of light-activated colloidal surfers, Science 339, 936 (2013)

    2013

  19. [26]

    Tierno, R

    P. Tierno, R. Golestanian, I. Pagonabarraga, and F. Sagu´ es, Controlled swimming in confined fluids of magnetically actuated colloidal rotors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 218304 (2008). 6

    2008

  20. [27]

    Mandal, G

    P. Mandal, G. Patil, H. Kakoty, and A. Ghosh, Magnetic active matter based on helical propulsion, Acc. Chem. Res. 51, 2689 (2018)

    2018

  21. [28]

    Thutupalli, R

    S. Thutupalli, R. Seemann, and S. Herminghaus, Swarm- ing behavior of simple model squirmers, New J. Phys.13, 073021 (2011)

    2011

  22. [29]

    Kumar, D

    M. Kumar, D. M. Walkama, J. S. Guasto, and A. M. Ardekani, Flow-induced buckling dynamics of sperm flag- ella, Phys. Rev. E 100, 063107 (2019)

    2019

  23. [30]

    Potomkin, M

    M. Potomkin, M. Tournus, L. V. Berlyand, and I. S. Aranson, Flagella bending affects macroscopic properties of bacterial suspensions, J. R. Soc. Interface14, 20161031 (2017)

    2017

  24. [31]

    Figueroa-Morales, L

    N. Figueroa-Morales, L. Dominguez-Rubio, T. L. Ott, and I. S. Aranson, Mechanical shear controls bacterial penetration in mucus, Sci. Rep. 9, 9713 (2019)

    2019

  25. [32]

    B. O. T. Maldonado, A. Th´ ery, R. Tao, Q. Brosseau, A. J. T. M. Mathijssen, and P. E. Arratia, Enhancement of bacterial rheotaxis in non-newtonian fluids, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 121, e2417614121 (2024)

    2024

  26. [33]

    Dauparas and E

    J. Dauparas and E. Lauga, Flagellar flows around bacte- rial swarms, Phys. Rev. Fluids 1, 043202 (2016)

    2016

  27. [34]

    T. C. Adhyapak and H. Stark, Dynamics of a bacterial flagellum under reverse rotation, Soft Matter 12, 5621 (2016)

    2016

  28. [35]

    Karimi, S

    A. Karimi, S. Yazdi, and A. M. Ardekani, Hydrodynamic mechanisms of cell and particle trapping in microfluidics, Biomicrofluidics 7, 021501 (2013)

    2013

  29. [36]

    Choudhary, S

    A. Choudhary, S. Paul, F. R¨ uhle, and H. Stark, How inertial lift affects the dynamics of a microswimmer in poiseuille flow, Commun. Phys. 5, 14 (2022)

    2022

  30. [37]

    D’Avino, F

    G. D’Avino, F. Greco, and P. L. Maffettone, Particle mi- gration due to viscoelasticity of the suspending liquid and its relevance in microfluidic devices, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 49, 341 (2017)

    2017

  31. [38]

    Choudhary and H

    A. Choudhary and H. Stark, On the cross-streamline lift of microswimmers in viscoelastic flows, Soft Matter 18, 48 (2022)

    2022

  32. [39]

    Choudhary, K

    A. Choudhary, K. V. S. Chaithanya, S. Michelin, and S. Pushpavanam, Self-propulsion in 2d confinement: phoretic and hydrodynamic interactions, Eur. Phys. J. E. 44, 97 (2021)

    2021

  33. [40]

    J. Hill, O. Kalkanci, J. L. McMurry, and H. Koser, Hy- drodynamic surface interactions enable escherichia coli to seek efficient routes to swim upstream, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 068101 (2007)

    2007

  34. [41]

    J. O. Kessler, Hydrodynamic focusing of motile algal cells, Nature (London) 313, 218 (1985)

    1985

  35. [42]

    C. M. Buness, A. Rana, C. C. Maass, and R. Dey, Electrotaxis of self-propelling artificial swimmers in mi- crochannels, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 158301 (2024)

    2024

  36. [43]

    Omori, K

    T. Omori, K. Kikuchi, M. Schmitz, M. Pavlovic, C.-H. Chuang, and T. Ishikawa, Rheotaxis and migration of an unsteady microswimmer, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 930, A30 (2022)

    2022

  37. [44]

    Tournus, A

    M. Tournus, A. Kirshtein, L. V. Berlyand, and I. S. Aran- son, Flexibility of bacterial flagella in external shear re- sults in complex swimming trajectories, Journal of the Royal Society Interface 12, 20140904 (2015)

    2015

  38. [45]

    F. P. Bretherton, The motion of rigid particles in a shear flow at low reynolds number, J. Fluid Mech. 14, 284–304 (1962); G. Segre and A. Silberberg, Radial particle displacements in poiseuille flow of suspensions, Nature 189, 209 (1961); M. Laumann, P. Bauknecht, S. Gekle, D...

    1962

  39. [46]

    Turner, R

    L. Turner, R. Zhang, N. C. Darnton, and H. C. Berg, Vi- sualization of flagella during bacterial swarming, J. Bac- teriol. 192, 3259 (2010)

    2010

  40. [47]

    J. K. Dhont, An introduction to dynamics of colloids(El- sevier, 1996)

    1996

  41. [48]

    Pozrikidis, Introduction to Theoretical and Computa- tional Fluid Dynamics, EBSCO ebook academic collec- tion (OUP USA, 2011)

    C. Pozrikidis, Introduction to Theoretical and Computa- tional Fluid Dynamics, EBSCO ebook academic collec- tion (OUP USA, 2011)

    2011

  42. [49]

    S. E. Spagnolie and E. Lauga, Hydrodynamics of self- propulsion near a boundary: predictions and accuracy of far-field approximations, J. Fluid Mech. 700, 105 (2012)

    2012

  43. [50]

    A. T. Chwang and T. Y.-T. Wu, Hydromechanics of low-reynolds-number flow. part 2. singularity method for stokes flows, J. Fluid Mech. 67, 787–815 (1975)

    1975

  44. [52]

    T. C. Adhyapak and H. Stark, Zipping and entanglement in flagellar bundle of e. coli: Role of motile cell body, Phys. Rev. E 92, 052701 (2015)

    2015

  45. [53]

    Rusconi, J

    R. Rusconi, J. S. Guasto, and R. Stocker, Bacterial trans- port suppressed by fluid shear, Nat. Phys.10, 212 (2014)

    2014

  46. [54]

    The cross-streaming in the shear-plane we discussed here is independent of, and can co-occur with, any shear mi- gration due to chirality [66, 67], if present

  47. [55]

    Junot, N

    G. Junot, N. Figueroa-Morales, T. Darnige, A. Lindner, R. Soto, H. Auradou, and E. Cl´ ement, Swimming bac- teria in poiseuille flow: The quest for active bretherton- jeffery trajectories, EPL 126, 44003 (2019)

    2019

  48. [56]

    and the non-uniform shear rate which increases from the midsection to the wall: when the swimmer faces the wall, its ‘tail’ is exposed to lower shear-rates, whereas the opposite is true when the swimmer faces the midsection [see schematic, Fig. 2(e)]. This mechanism underlies ...

    2021

  49. [57]

    To be precise, the HT asymmetry about the hydrody- namic center rs − rsh; however, the difference can be ignored for the present discussion due to the slenderness of the flagellar rod

  50. [58]

    S. H. Strogatz, Nonlinear dynamics and chaos: with ap- plications to physics, biology, chemistry, and engineering (CRC press, 2018)

    2018

  51. [59]

    Vennamneni, S

    L. Vennamneni, S. Nambiar, and G. Subramanian, Shear- induced migration of microswimmers in pressure-driven channel flow, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 890, A15 (2020)

    2020

  52. [60]

    coli, due to the variation of flagellar attachment points on the cell body

    The rigidity modulus k can vary,e.g., in the population of peritrichous bacteria such as E. coli, due to the variation of flagellar attachment points on the cell body

  53. [61]

    Kim and S

    S. Kim and S. J. Karrila, Microhydrodynamics: princi- ples and selected applications(Butterworth-Heinemann, 2013)

    2013

  54. [62]

    P. J. A. Janssen and M. D. Graham, Coexistence of tight and loose bundled states in a model of bacterial flagellar dynamics, Phys. Rev. E 84, 011910 (2011)

    2011

  55. [63]

    T. C. Adhyapak and S. Jabbari-Farouji, Flow proper- ties and hydrodynamic interactions of rigid spherical mi- croswimmers, Phys. Rev. E 96, 052608 (2017)

    2017

  56. [64]

    Y. O. Fuentes, S. Kim, and D. J. Jeffrey, Mobility func- tions for two unequal viscous drops in stokes flow. i. ax- isymmetric motions, Phys. Fluids 31, 2445 (1988)

    1988

  57. [65]

    Y. O. Fuentes, S. Kim, and D. J. Jeffrey, Mobility func- 7 tions for two unequal viscous drops in stokes flow. ii. asymmetric motions, Phys. Fluids 1, 61 (1989)

    1989

  58. [66]

    Abramowitz, I

    M. Abramowitz, I. A. Stegun, and R. H. Romer, Hand- book of mathematical functions with formulas, graphs, and mathematical tables, Am. J. Phys. 56, 958 (1988)

    1988

  59. [67]

    Marcos, H. C. Fu, T. R. Powers, and R. Stocker, Bacterial rheotaxis, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 109, 4780 (2012)

    2012

  60. [68]

    Makino and M

    M. Makino and M. Doi, Migration of twisted ribbon-like particles in simple shear flow, Phys. Fluids 17, 103605 (2005). Appendix A: Solution of ψ dynamics Eq. (7) involves the deviations ψ = θ − θ∗ and ˙ψ = ˙θ − ˙θ∗, where ˙θ∗ denotes the value of ˙θ at the fixed point (FP). Re...

    2005

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.