4.4 Article

Interaction Between Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and Acanthamoeba polyphaga

Journal

CURRENT MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 74, Issue 5, Pages 541-549

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00284-017-1196-z

Keywords

Acanthamoeba polyphaga; Staphylococcus aureus; Co-culture; Interaction

Categories

Funding

  1. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior (CAPES)
  2. Microbiology, Immunology and Parasitology Department of the Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The interactions that occur between bacteria and amoebae can give through mutual relations, where both organisms benefit from the association or parasitic in which one organism benefits at the expense of the other. When these organisms share the same environment, it can result in some changes in the growth of organisms, in adaptation patterns, in morphology, development or even in their ability to synthesize proteins and other substances. In this study, the interaction between Acanthamoeba polyphaga and Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was evaluated using a co-culture model at different incubation times. The results showed that 89% of amoebic cells remained viable after contact with the bacteria. The bacterial isolate was visualized inside the amoeba through confocal microscopy and fluorescence for up to 216 h of co-cultivation. The lysate of amoebic culture increased the growth of S. aureus (MRSA), and the effect of supernatant of culture inhibited bacterial growth over the incubation times, suggesting that A. polyphaga produced some metabolite, that inhibited the growth of bacteria. Moreover, the encystment of the A. polyphaga was increased by the bacteria presence. The results show that A. polyphaga and S. aureus interaction may have an important influence on survival of both, and specially indicate a possible effect on the metabolics characteristics each other.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available