4.6 Article

The role of EII complex in the bacterial responses to the glucose-survey in clinical Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 18, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0289759

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study found that for most clinical isolates of Klebsiella pneumoniae, the amount of etcABC mRNA was positively related to their type 3 fimbriae production in a high level of glucose, thereby to their biofilm formation and colonization in the worm. However, in some isolates, MrkA was significantly reduced by high glucose levels.
Type 3 fimbriae in Klebsiella pneumoniae are important for bacterial colonization on abiotic and biotic surfaces. The major subunit of type 3 fimbriae (MrkA) is increased by overexpression of EtcABC, an EII complex of phosphoenolpyruvate:carbohydrate phosphotransferase systems (PTSs), through cAMP-cAMP receptor protein (cAMP-CRP) in K. pneumoniae STU1. Here, we further characterized the relations between the amount of etcABC mRNA and MrkA in 78 clinical K. pneumoniae isolates incubated in high levels of glucose. By Western blotting, we observed that MrkA of 29 isolates were not decreased much by high levels of glucose (Group A) but MrkA of other 49 isolates were significantly reduced (Group B) in the same condition. The bacterial biofilms on abiotic surfaces and colonization in the Caenorhabditis elegans of representative isolates in the Group A were not affected by high levels of glucose. However, the biofilm and colonization in the worm of clinical isolates in the Group B were much reduced by high levels of glucose. After quantification by real time RT-PCR, 76% of Group A but just 10% of Group B showed high amount of etcA mRNA. In summary, our results suggested that for most of K. pneumoniae clinical isolates, the amount of etcABC mRNA was positively related to their type 3 fimbriae production in a high level of glucose, thereby to their biofilm formation and colonization in the worm.

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