1887

Microbiology Society logo

Volume 145, Issue 10

The effect of motility and cell-surface polymers on bacterial attachment Free

Abstract

Recently it was shown that motility of facilitated cell attachment to glass surfaces. In the present study the same relationship between motility and cell attachment was confirmed for and spp. These findings clearly answer a long-standing question: does motility facilitate attachment? However, they are contradictory to a general view on cell attachment that the energy barrier due to electrostatic repulsion between negatively charged bacterial cells and a glass surface is much greater than both the thermal kinetic energy of the bacterial cell and the bacterial swimming energy. It is shown that the energy barrier becomes far less than that usually estimated when bacterial cells are rich in polymers at their surfaces. This finding reasonably explains the dependence of bacterial attachment rate on cell motility and demands reconsideration of the mechanism of bacterial attachment.

  • Received:
  • Accepted:
  • Revised:
  • Published Online:
Keyword(s): cell attachment , electrostatic repulsion , EPM, electrophoretic mobility , motility , soft particle , SSW, synthetic seawater and surface polymers
© Microbiology Society
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/micro/10.1099/00221287-145-10-2797
1999-10-01
2024-04-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/micro/145/10/1452797a.html?itemId=/content/journal/micro/10.1099/00221287-145-10-2797&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Bos, R., van der Mei, H. C. & Busscher, H. J. (1998). ‘Soft-particle’ analysis of the electrophoretic mobility of a fibrillated and non-fibrillated oral streptococcal strain: Streptococcus salivarius. Biophys Chem 74, 251-255.[CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. Hjerten, S. (1967). Free zone electrophoresis. Chromatogr Rev 9, 122-219.[CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. Kawahata, S., Ohshima, H., Muramatsu, N. & Kondo, T. (1990). Charge distribution in the surface region of human erythrocytes as estimated from electrophoretic mobility data. J Colloid Interface Sci 138, 182-186.[CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. Kogure, K., Ikemoto, E. & Morisaki, H. (1998). Attachment of Vibrio alginolyticus to glass surfaces is dependent on swimming speed. J Bacteriol 180, 932-937. [Google Scholar]
  5. Korber, D. R., Lawrence, J. R., Lappin-Scott, H. M. & Costerton, J. W. (1995). Growth of microorganisms on surfaces. In Microbial Biofilms, pp. 15-45. Edited by H. M. Lappin-Scott & J. W. Costerton. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  6. van Loosdrecht, M. C. M., Lyklema, J., Norde, W., Schraa, G. & Zehnder, A. J. B. (1987). Electrophoretic mobility and hydrophobicity as a measure to predict the initial steps of bacterial adhesion. Appl Environ Microbiol 53, 1898-1901. [Google Scholar]
  7. Makino, K., Yamamoto, S., Fujimoto, K., Kawaguchi, H. & Ohshima, H. (1994). Surface structure of latex particles covered with temperature-sensitive hydrogel layers. J Colloid Interface Sci 166, 251-258.[CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. Marshall, K. C., Stout, R. & Mitchell, R. (1971). Mechanism of the initial events in the sorption of marine bacteria to surfaces. J Gen Microbiol 68, 337-348.[CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. Ohshima, H. (1994). Electrophoretic mobility of soft particles. JColloid Interface Sci 163, 474-483.[CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. Ohshima, H. (1995). Electrophoresis of soft particles. Adv Colloid Interface Sci 62, 189-235.[CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  11. Ohshima, H., Makino, K., Kato, T., Fujimoto, K., Kondo, T. & Kawaguchi, H. (1993). Electrophoretic mobility of latex particles with temperature-sensitive hydrogel layers. J Colloid Interface Sci 159, 512-514.[CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. Rijnaarts, H. H. M., Norde, W., Bouwer, E. J., Lyklema, J. & Zehnder, A. J. B. (1995). Reversibility and mechanism of bacterial adhesion. Colloids Surf B: Biointerfaces 4, 5–22.[CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. Rogers, H. J. (1979). Adhesion of microorganisms to surfaces: some general considerations of the role of the envelope In Adhesion of Microorganisms to Surfaces, pp. 29-55. Edited by D. C. Ellwood, J. Melling & P. Rutter. London: Academic Press.
  14. Sonohara, R., Muramatsu, N., Ohshima, H. & Kondo, T. (1995). Differences in surface properties between Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus as revealed by electrophoretic mobility measurements. Biophys Chem 55, 273-277.[CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. Takashima, S. & Morisaki, H. (1997). Surface characteristics of the microbial cell of Pseudomonas syringae and its relevance to cell attachment. Colloids Surf B: Biointerfaces 9, 205-212.[CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. van der Wal, A., Minor, M., Norde, W., Zehnder, A. J. B. & Lyklema, J. (1997). Electrokinetic potential of bacterial cells. Langmuir 13, 165-171.[CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/micro/10.1099/00221287-145-10-2797
Loading
The effect of motility and cell-surface polymers on bacterial attachment
Microbiology 145, 2797 (1999); https://doi.org/10.1099/00221287-145-10-2797
/content/journal/micro/10.1099/00221287-145-10-2797
/content/journal/micro/10.1099/00221287-145-10-2797
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