Ultrastructural Analysis of Differences in the Growth and Maturation of Staphylococcus pseudintermedius Biofilm on Biotic and Abiotic Surfaces

Biofilms are extremely complex yet systematic microbial structures. Studies comparing the differences in their growth on living and nonliving surfaces by electron microscopy are limited. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to ultrastructurally investigate the differences in the growth and development of Staphylococcal biofilm on polycarbonate filters and canine skin explants. Using scanning and transmission electron microscopy (SEM and TEM), Staphylococcus pseudintermedius was incubated for 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h. It was observed that similar amounts of exopolymeric substance (EPS) were deposited on the biofilm on both surfaces, but the biofilm on the skin explants was primarily flat, whereas the biofilm on the membrane developed a multilayered plateaued look. Microcolony formation was only observed on the membrane filter during the early stages of biofilm development. On the membrane biofilms, EPS was observed to be deposited in a distinctive pattern. EPS deposition on the membrane surface was observed to peak before it declined, but on the explant, a constant increase was observed at all time points. Cell exposure to the environment on both the membrane filters and explants differed depending on the stage of biofilm formation. On both the membranes and the skin explants, there was a perceptible difference between the biofilm growth patterns and speeds. The results of this study suggest that data extrapolated from studies on biofilm bactericidal compounds performed on abiotic surfaces (such as polycarbonate filters) may not be entirely applicable to biofilm growing on biotic surfaces (e.g., skin) due to ultrastructural variations revealed in this study. IMPORTANCE Biofilm has been recognized as an important source of antimicrobial resistance. These sessile microbial colonies tend to attach and grow on every surface, biotic and abiotic, and they account for approximately 80% of chronic and recurrent infections. Biofilms are not all alike; they have different structures and microbial compositions. This high variability allows for differences in the production of exopolymer substances, affecting antimicrobial penetration. No studies have been published that simultaneously compare the structure of biofilms grown on abiotic (in vitro) and biotic (ex vivo) surfaces. To identify treatment alternatives, it is essential to understand the differences between biofilms. The results of the study show how biofilm structures and compositions are dependent on the substrate on which they grow.