4.6 Article

The efficacy of tannic acid in controlling biofouling by Pseudomonas aeruginosa is dependent on nutrient conditions and bacterial density

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ibiod.2015.05.004

关键词

Tannic acid; Biofouling; Biofilm reduction; Biofilm enhancement; Pseudomonas aeruginosa

资金

  1. Environment & Water Industry Programme Office [PUB 2P 21100/36/5]
  2. PUB, the Singapore's National Water Agency [200104]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the effect of tannic acid (TA) on biofilm formation by Pseudomonas aeruginosa PAO1 as a model organism. Here, we report that TA enhanced biofilm formation in M9 medium at a bacterial concentration of 0.1 (OD600) on different model surfaces such as: polystyrene microtiter plate, polypropylene tube and borosilicate glass tube. However, TA reduced biofilm formation by PAO1 in M9 and yeast nutrient broth (YNB) media at a bacterial concentration of 0.001 (OD600). Strikingly, TA reduced biofilm formation at a bacterial concentration of 0.01 (OD600) in YNB medium but increased biofilm formation in M9 medium. When yeast extract (10 g/l) was added to the M9 medium TA reduced biofilm formation (51.0%). These trends were confirmed qualitatively and quantitatively by confocal microscopy. In the presence of yeast extract, TA exhibited 89.0% biofilm biovolume reduction compared to the untreated control. When yeast extract, tryptone and L-arginine were added to M9 medium, TA showed anti-biofilm activity at all bacterial densities tested. When tannase was added, the anti-biofilm efficacy of TA decreased. Furthermore, organic nitrogen limitation triggered TA degradation in the cultures (P < 0.05), which in turn restored biofilm formation. These results suggest that bacterial density and nutritional conditions are critical to the anti-biofilm efficacy of TA against PAO1 and thus may explain differences in the literature regarding the effect of TA on biofilm formation. (c) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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