Biofilms represent microbial communities, encased in a self-produced matrix or extracellular polymeric substance. Microbial biofilms are likely responsible for a large proportion of clinically significant infections and the multicellular nature of biofilm existence has been repeatedly associated with antibiotic resistance. Classical in vitro antibiotic-susceptibility testing utilizes artificial growth media and planktonic microbes, but this method may not account for the variability inherent in environments subject to biofilm growth in vivo. Experiments were designed to test the hypothesis that nutrient concentration can modulate the antibiotic susceptibility of Staphylococcus aureus biofilms. Developing S. aureus biofilms initiated on surgical sutures, and in selected experiments planktonic cultures, were incubated for 16 h in 66 % tryptic soy broth, 0.2 % glucose (1× TSBg), supplemented with bactericidal concentrations of gentamicin, streptomycin, ampicillin or vancomycin. In parallel experiments, antibiotics were added to growth medium diluted one-third (1/3× TSBg) or concentrated threefold (3× TSBg). Following incubation, viable bacteria were enumerated from planktonic cultures or suture sonicates, and biofilm biomass was assayed using spectrophotometry. Interestingly, bactericidal concentrations of gentamicin (5 µg gentamicin ml−1) and streptomycin (32 µg streptomycin ml−1) inhibited biofilm formation in samples incubated in 1/3× or 1× TSBg, but not in samples incubated in 3× TSBg. The nutrient dependence of aminoglycoside susceptibility is not only associated with biofilm formation, as planktonic cultures incubated in 3× TSBg in the presence of gentamicin also showed antibiotic resistance. These findings appeared specific for aminoglycosides because biofilm formation was inhibited in all three growth media supplemented with bactericidal concentrations of the cell wall-active antibiotics, ampicillin and vancomycin. Additional experiments showed that the ability of 3× TSBg to overcome the antibacterial effects of gentamicin was associated with decreased uptake of gentamicin by S. aureus. Uptake is known to be decreased at low pH, and the kinetic change in pH of growth medium from biofilms incubated in 5 µg gentamicin ml−1 in the presence of 3× TSBg was decreased when compared with pH determinations from biofilms formed in 1/3× or 1× TSBg. These studies underscore the importance of environmental factors, including nutrient concentration and pH, on the antibiotic susceptibility of S. aureus planktonic and biofilm bacteria.
CosP., TotéK., HoremansT., MaesL.2010; Biofilms: an extra hurdle for effective antimicrobial therapy. Curr Pharm Des 16:2279–2295 [View Article][PubMed]
DaiC. F., MangiardiD., CotancheD. A., SteygerP. S.2006; Uptake of fluorescent gentamicin by vertebrate sensory cells in vivo. Hear Res 213:64–78 [View Article][PubMed]
EisenbergE. S., MandelL. J., KabackH. R., MillerM. H.1984; Quantitative association between electrical potential across the cytoplasmic membrane and early gentamicin uptake and killing in Staphylococcus aureus. J Bacteriol 157:863–867[PubMed]
Hall-StoodleyL., CostertonJ. W., StoodleyP.2004; Bacterial biofilms: from the natural environment to infectious diseases. Nat Rev Microbiol 2:95–108 [View Article][PubMed]
HongY., BrownD. G.2009; Variation in bacterial ATP level and proton motive force due to adhesion to a solid surface. Appl Environ Microbiol 75:2346–2353 [View Article][PubMed]
KotraL. P., HaddadJ., MobasheryS.2000; Aminoglycosides: perspectives on mechanisms of action and resistance and strategies to counter resistance. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 44:3249–3256 [View Article][PubMed]
MatesS. M., EisenbergE. S., MandelL. J., PatelL., KabackH. R., MillerM. H.1982; Membrane potential and gentamicin uptake in Staphylococcus aureus. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 79:6693–6697 [View Article][PubMed]
RömlingU., BalsalobreC.2012; Biofilm infections, their resilience to therapy and innovative treatment strategies. J Intern Med 272:541–561 [View Article][PubMed]
SmithP. A., RomesbergF. E.2007; Combating bacteria and drug resistance by inhibiting mechanisms of persistence and adaptation. Nat Chem Biol 3:549–556 [View Article][PubMed]
TsengB. S., ZhangW., HarrisonJ. J., QuachT. P., SongJ. L., PentermanJ., SinghP. K., ChoppD. L., PackmanA. I., ParsekM. R.2013; The extracellular matrix protects Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms by limiting the penetration of tobramycin. Environ Microbiol 15:2865–2878[PubMed]
WellsC. L., Henry-StanleyM. J., BarnesA. M. T., DunnyG. M., HessD. J.2011; Relation between antibiotic susceptibility and ultrastructure of Staphylococcusaureus biofilms on surgical suture. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 12:297–305 [View Article][PubMed]
WuJ., XiC.2009; Evaluation of different methods for extracting extracellular DNA from the biofilm matrix. Appl Environ Microbiol 75:5390–5395 [View Article][PubMed]