4.6 Article

The architecture of a mixed fungal-bacterial biofilm is modulated by quorum-sensing signals

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 23, 期 5, 页码 2433-2447

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/1462-2920.15444

关键词

-

资金

  1. IBISBA1.0 H2020 project [730976]
  2. [BIO2015-73697-JIN-AEI/FEDER/UE]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluated the interaction between the fungus Ophiostoma piceae and the bacterium Pseudomonas putida in biofilm formation and the impact of signal molecules on biofilm architecture. Results showed the ability of the fungus to form biofilms independently for the first time, and highlighted the crucial role of signal molecules in biofilm formation.
Interkingdom communication is of particular relevance in polymicrobial biofilms. In this work, the ability of the fungus Ophiostoma piceae to form biofilms individually and in consortium with the bacterium Pseudomonas putida, as well as the effect of fungal and bacterial signal molecules on the architecture of the biofilms was evaluated. Pseudomonas putida KT2440 is able to form biofilms through the secretion of exopolysaccharides and two large extracellular adhesion proteins, LapA and LapF. It has two intercellular signalling systems, one mediated by dodecanoic acid and an orphan LuxR receptor that could participate in the response to AHL-type quorum sensing molecules (QSMs). Furthermore, the dimorphic fungus O. piceae uses farnesol as QSM to control its yeast to hyphae morphological transition. Results show for the first time the ability of this fungus to form biofilms alone and in mixed cultures with the bacterium. Biofilms were induced by bacterial and fungal QSMs. The essential role of LapA-LapF proteins in the architecture of biofilms was corroborated, LapA was induced by farnesol and dodecanol, while LapF by 3-oxo-C6-HSL and 3-oxo-C12-HSL. Our results indicate that fungal signals can induce a transient rise in the levels of the secondary messenger c-di-GMP, which control biofilm formation and architecture.

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

4.6
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