4.8 Article

Mycelial Effects on Phage Retention during Transport in a Microfluidic Platform

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 53, 期 20, 页码 11755-11763

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.9b03502

关键词

-

资金

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG)
  2. Swiss National Science Foundation (Ambizione grant) [PZOOP2_168005]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Phages (i.e., viruses that infect bacteria) have been considered as good tracers for the hydrological transport of colloids and (pathogenic) viruses. However, little is known about interactions of phages with (fungal) mycelia as the prevalent soil microbial biomass. Forming extensive and dense networks, mycelia provide significant surfaces for phage-hyphal interactions. Here, for the first time, we quantified the mycelial retention of phages in a microfluidic platform that allowed for defined fluid exchange around hyphae. Two common lytic tracer phages (Escherichia coli phage T4 and marine phage PSA-HS2) and two mycelia of differing surface properties (Coprinopsis cinerea and Pythium ultimum) were employed. Phage-hyphal interaction energies were approximated by the extended Derjaguin-Landau-Verwey-Overbeek (XDLVO) approach of colloidal interaction. Our data show initial hyphal retention of phages of up to approximate to 4 x 10(7) plaque-forming unit (PFU) mm(-2) (approximate to 12550 PFU mm(-2) s(-1)) with a retention efficiency depending on the hyphal and, to a lesser extent, the phage surface properties. Experimental data were supported by XDLVO calculations, which revealed the highest attractive forces for the interaction between hydrophobic T4 phages and hydrophobic C. cinerea surfaces. Our data suggest that mycelia may be relevant for the retention of phages in the subsurface and need to be considered in subsurface phage tracer studies. Mycelia-phage interactions may further be exploited for the development of novel strategies to reduce or hinder the transport of undesirable (bio) colloidal entities in environmental filter systems.

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

4.8
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