4.6 Article

Probing Roles of Lipopolysaccharide, Type 1 Fimbria, and Colanic Acid in the Attachment of Escherichia coli Strains on Inert Surfaces

Journal

LANGMUIR
Volume 27, Issue 18, Pages 11545-11553

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/la202534p

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Hong Kong UGC [SEG HKU10]
  2. HKU

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The roles of bacterial surface polymers in reversible (phase I) and irreversible (phase II) attachment (i.e., lipopolysaccharides (LPS), type 1 fimbria, and capsular colanic acid (CA)) were investigated in situ by combining fluorescence microscopy and atomic force microscopy. Fluorescence Microscopy was used to evaluate the phase,I attachment by counting. the total number of cells on the substrata, and AFM was applied to image the phase II cells and measure the lateral detachment force to characterize phase II attachment. Also, by comparing the number of cells in phases I and II, the transformation ratio was calculated and used as an index to evaluate the roles of different polymers in the attachment process. Escherichia coli K-12 and its six mutants, which had different surface polymers in terms of Lps structures, CA contents, and type 1 fimbriae, were used as the test strains. Six different materials were applied as substrata, including glass, two metals (aluminum and stainless steel), and three plastics (polyvinyl chloride, polycathonate, and polyethylene). The results indicated that LPS significantly enhanced phases land H attachment as well as the transformation ratio from phase I to II. Like LPS, type 1 fimbriae largely increased the phase I attachment and the transformation ratio; however, they did not significantly influence the adhesion strength in phase II. CA had a negative effect on attachment in phases I and II by decreasing the adhered number of cells and the lateral detachment force, respectively, but had no influence on the transformation ratio.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available