1887

Microbiology Society logo

Volume 130, Issue 1

Motility as a Factor in Bowel Colonization by , an Obligately Anaerobic Bacterium from the Mouse Caecum Free

Abstract

strain GM is a motile obligate anaerobe that was isolated from mouse caecal mucosa. Twenty-five strains of motility mutants were obtained from populations of strain GM (wild-type) that had been exposed to UV light. Unlike GM cells, mutant bacteria were either non-motile and non-flagellated (Fla) or migrated slowly or atypically in semi-solid medium. Strain GM and two mutant strains, SLS (Fla) and WES (atypically motile), were used in mouse colonization experiments. In separate experiments, each strain colonized (4·8 × 10 to 1·5 × 10 c.f.u. per g caecum) the caecum of germfree mice inoculated intragastrically with pure cultures of the bacteria. In mice mono-associated with either mutant strain, bacteria which were non-motile or atypically motile predominated in their caeca (< 99% of total bacteria recovered). In mice mono-associated with motile cells of strain GM, mutant strains which had lost wild-type motility became predominant in the caecal populations (97% of total bacteria recovered at 48 to 70 days after inoculation). Mice mono-associated with either strain SLS or strain GM were colonized by one strain each of , a sp., and a sp. Most (99%) of the cells recovered from the caeca of these animals had typical wild-type motility. Motility, although not essential for to colonize germfree mice, is apparently advantageous to this bacterium when other micro-organisms are present with it in the mouse caecum. Motility may thus be essential for to colonize conventional laboratory mice.

  • Received:
  • Revised:
  • Published Online:
© Society for General Microbiology 1984
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/micro/10.1099/00221287-130-1-173
1984-01-01
2024-04-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/micro/130/1/mic-130-1-173.html?itemId=/content/journal/micro/10.1099/00221287-130-1-173&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Adler J. 1966; Chemotaxis in bacteria. Science 153:708–716
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Allweiss B., Dostal J., Carey K. E., Edwards T. F., Freter R. 1977; The role of chemotaxis in the ecology of bacterial pathogens of mucosal surfaces. Nature; London: 266448–450
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Artwohl J. E., Savage D. C. 1979; Determinants in microbial colonization of the murine gastrointestinal tract: pH, temperature, and energy-yielding metabolism of Torulopsis pintolopesii. . Applied and Environmental Microbiology 37:697–703
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Berg R. D. 1978; Antagonism among the normal anaerobic bacteria of the mouse gastrointestinal tract determined by immunofluorescence. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 35: 1066–1073
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Bloom B. R. 1979; Games parasites play: how parasites evade immune surveillance. Nature; London: 27921–26
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Chet I., Mitchell R. 1976; Ecological aspects of microbial chemotactic behavior. Annual Review of Microbiology 30:221–239
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Enomoto M. 1965; Slow motile mutant in Salmonella typhimurium. . Journal of Bacteriology 90:1696–1702
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Freter R., O’Brien P. C. M., Halstead S. A. 1978; Adhesion and chemotaxis as determinants of bacterial association with mucosal surfaces. In The Secretory Immune System and Caries Immunity pp. 429–437 McGhee J. R., Mastecky J. Edited by New York: Plenum Press;
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Freter R., O’Brien P. C. M., Macsai M. S. 1979; Effect of chemotaxis on the interaction of cholera vibrios with intestinal mucosa. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 32:128–132
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Freter R., O’Brien P. C. M., Macsai M. S. 1981; Role of chemotaxis in the association of motile bacteria with intestinal mucosa: in vivo studies. Infection and Immunity 34:234–240
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Gibbons R. J., Socransky S. S., Kapsimalis B. 1964; Establishment of human indigenous bacteria in germfree mice. Journal of Bacteriology 88:13l6–1323
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Gibbons R. J., Qureshi J. V. 1980; Virulence- related physiological changes and antigenic variation in populations of Streptococcus mutans colonizing gnotobiotic rats. Infection and Immunity 29:1082–1091
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Gordon J. H., Dubqs R. 1970; The anaerobic bacterial flora of the mouse cecum. Journal of Experimental Medicine 132:251–260
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Guentzel M. N., BeRy L. J. 1975; Motility as a virulence factor for Vibrio cholerae. . Infection and Immunity 11:890–897
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Guentzel M. N., Field L. H., Eubanks E. R., BeRy L. J. 1977; Use of fluorescent antibody in studies of immunity to cholera in infant mice. Infection and Immunity 15:539–548
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Holder I. A., Wheeler R., Montie T. C. 1982; Flagellar preparations from Pseudomonas aeruginosa: animal protection studies. Infection and Immunity 35:276–280
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Jones G. W., Richardson L. A., Uhlman D. 1981; The invasion of HeLa cells by Salmonella typhimurium: reversible and iReversible bacterial attachment and the role of bacterial motility. Journal of General Microbiology 127:351–360
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Rosebury T. 1962 Microorganisms Indigenous to Man. New York, Toronto & London: McGraw- Hill;
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Sack R. B., Miller C. E. 1969; Progressive changes of vibrio serotypes in germfree mice infected with Vibrio cholerae. . Journal of Bacteriology 99:688–695
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Savage D. C. 1969; Microbial interference between indigenous yeast and lactobacilli in the rodent stomach. Journal of Bacteriology 98:1278–1283
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Savage D. C. 1980; Colonization by and survival of pathogenic bacteria on intestinal mucosal surfaces. In Adsorption of Microorganisms to Surfaces pp. 176–206 Bitton G., Marshall K. C. Edited by New York, London, Sydney & Toronto: John Wiley;
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Skerman V. B. D. 1969 Abstracts of Microbiological Methods. New York, London, Sydney & Toronto: John Wiley;
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Stanton T. B., Savage D. C. 1983a; Colonization of gnotobiotic mice by Roseburia cecicola, a motile, obligately anaerobic bacterium from the mouse cecum. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 45:1677–1684
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Stanton T. B., Savage D. C. 1983b; Roseburia cecicola, gen. nov., sp., nov., a motile, obligately anaerobic bacterium from the mouse cecum. International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology 33:618–627
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Tannock G. W., Savage D. C. 1976; Indigenous microorganisms prevent reduction in cecal size induced by Salmonella typhimurium in vaccinated gnotobiotic mice. Infection and Immunity 13:172–179
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Whitt D. D., Savage D. C. 1980; Kinetics of changes induced by indigenous microbiota in the activity levels of alkaline phosphatase and disac- charidases in small intestinal enterocytes in mice. Infection and Immunity 29:144–151
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Yancey R. J., Willis D. L., BeRy L. J. 1978; Role of motility in experimental cholera in adult rabbits. Infection and Immunity 22:387–392
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/micro/10.1099/00221287-130-1-173
Loading
Motility as a Factor in Bowel Colonization by Roseburia cecicola, an Obligately Anaerobic Bacterium from the Mouse Caecum
Microbiology 130, 173 (1984); https://doi.org/10.1099/00221287-130-1-173
/content/journal/micro/10.1099/00221287-130-1-173
/content/journal/micro/10.1099/00221287-130-1-173
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error