For the same concentration gradient, the front-to-back difference scales with cell length. A much smaller bacterial cell samples a correspondingly smaller spatial signal, while stochastic arrival and binding of individual chemoattractant molecules make receptor measurements noisy. For illustration, a cell in the cm capillary would experience only across its length, compared with for the longer cell. This illustrates a size penalty; it does not assume that bacterial and human detection thresholds are identical.
Many swimming bacteria, including Escherichia coli, use temporal sensing in bacterial chemotaxis: they compare recent receptor stimulation with an adapted baseline as they move. Increasing attractant suppresses reorientation and prolongs runs; decreasing attractant increases tumbling. Repeated runs and reorientations therefore generate a biased random walk up the gradient, without requiring a simultaneous comparison between the front and back. Chemotaxis feedback regulation supplies the adaptation needed to remain sensitive to changes rather than responding only to absolute concentration.
A discriminating experiment changes concentration rapidly and uniformly around the bacteria: a response then occurs without a spatial difference across the cell. The classic temporal-step experiments found increased tumbling after attractant decreases and smoother swimming after increases.[ref]
The gradient-sensing mechanism in bacterial chemotaxis by Robert M. Macnab and Daniel E. Koshland Jr.. pp. 2509–2512, Abstract and temporal-gradient response experiments
In a new experiment, compare up-steps and down-steps with constant-concentration and sham-mixing controls, holding temperature and medium composition fixed. Measure run durations and tumble frequency, rather than only average swimming speed. Such a test supports temporal comparison but does not by itself identify every molecular component or show that all bacterial species use the same mechanism. Temporal sensing in bacterial chemotaxis 2026-10-20
Temporal sensing in bacterial chemotaxis compares changing stimulation during movement with a recent adapted baseline. Attractant increases can lengthen runs and decreases can increase tumbling, producing biased movement up a chemical gradient. Rapid spatially uniform concentration steps distinguish a temporal response from a requirement for front-to-back spatial comparison.[ref]
The gradient-sensing mechanism in bacterial chemotaxis by Robert M. Macnab and Daniel E. Koshland Jr.. pp. 2509–2512, temporal gradient apparatus and motility responses