4.7 Article

The trimeric autotransporter adhesin BadA is required for in vitro biofilm formation by Bartonella henselae

期刊

NPJ BIOFILMS AND MICROBIOMES
卷 5, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41522-019-0083-8

关键词

-

资金

  1. BLRD VA [IK6 BX004212] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bartonella henselae (Bh) is a Gram-negative rod transmitted to humans by a scratch from the common house cat. Infection of humans with Bh can result in a range of clinical diseases including lymphadenopathy observed in cat-scratch disease and more serious disease from persistent bacteremia. It is a common cause of blood-culture negative endocarditis as the bacterium is capable of growing as aggregates, and forming biofilms on infected native and prosthetic heart valves. The aggregative growth requires a trimeric autotransporter adhesin (TAA) called Bartonella adhesin A (BadA). TAAs are found in all Bartonella species and many other Gram-negative bacteria. Using Bh Houston-1, Bh Houston-1 Delta badA and Bh Houston-1 Delta badA/pNS2P(Trc)badA (a partial complement of badA coding for a truncated protein of 741 amino acid residues), we analyze the role of BadA in adhesion and biofilm formation. We also investigate the role of environmental factors such as temperature on badA expression and biofilm formation. Real-time cell adhesion monitoring and electron microscopy show that Bh Houston-1 adheres and forms biofilm more efficiently than the Bh Houston-1 Delta badA. Deletion of the badA gene significantly decreases adhesion, the first step in biofilm formation in vitro, which is partially restored in Bh Houston-1 Delta badA/pNS2P(Trc)badA. The biofilm formed by Bh Houston-1 includes polysaccharides, proteins, and DNA components and is susceptible to enzymatic degradation of these components. Furthermore, both pH and temperature influence both badA expression and biofilm formation. We conclude that BadA is required for optimal adhesion, agglutination and biofilm formation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据