Cargando…
Comparison of Biofilm Formation between Major Clonal Lineages of Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus
OBJECTIVES: Epidemic methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) clones cause infections in both hospital and community settings. As a biofilm phenotype further facilitates evasion of the host immune system and antibiotics, we compared the biofilm-forming capacities of various MRSA clones. METHODS: Seven...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4126748/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25105505 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0104561 |
_version_ | 1782329960258600960 |
---|---|
author | Vanhommerig, Evelyn Moons, Pieter Pirici, Daniel Lammens, Christine Hernalsteens, Jean-Pierre De Greve, Henri Kumar-Singh, Samir Goossens, Herman Malhotra-Kumar, Surbhi |
author_facet | Vanhommerig, Evelyn Moons, Pieter Pirici, Daniel Lammens, Christine Hernalsteens, Jean-Pierre De Greve, Henri Kumar-Singh, Samir Goossens, Herman Malhotra-Kumar, Surbhi |
author_sort | Vanhommerig, Evelyn |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: Epidemic methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) clones cause infections in both hospital and community settings. As a biofilm phenotype further facilitates evasion of the host immune system and antibiotics, we compared the biofilm-forming capacities of various MRSA clones. METHODS: Seventy-six MRSA classified into 13 clones (USA300, EMRSA-15, Hungarian/Brazilian etc.), and isolated from infections or from carriers were studied for biofilm formation under static and dynamic conditions. Static biofilms in microtitre plates were quantified colorimetrically. Dynamic biofilms (Bioflux 200, Fluxion, USA) were studied by confocal laser-scanning and time-lapse microscopy, and the total volume occupied by live/dead bacteria quantified by Volocity 5.4.1 (Improvision, UK). RESULTS: MRSA harbouring SCCmec IV produced significantly more biomass under static conditions than SCCmec I–III (P = 0.003), and those harbouring SCCmec II significantly less than those harbouring SCCmec I or III (P<0.001). In the dynamic model, SCCmec I–III harbouring MRSA were significantly better biofilm formers than SCCmec IV (P = 0.036). Only 16 strains successfully formed biofilms under both conditions, of which 13 harboured SCCmec IV and included all tested USA300 strains (n = 3). However, USA300 demonstrated remarkably lower percentages of cell-occupied space (6.6%) compared to the other clones (EMRSA-15 = 19.0%) under dynamic conditions. Time-lapse microscopy of dynamic biofilms demonstrated that USA300 formed long viscoelastic tethers that stretched far from the point of attachment, while EMRSA-15 consisted of micro-colonies attached densely to the surface. CONCLUSIONS: MRSA harbouring SCCmec types IV and I–III demonstrate distinct biofilm forming capacities, possibly owing to their adaptation to the community and hospital settings, respectively. USA300 demonstrated abundant biofilm formation under both conditions, which probably confers a competitive advantage, contributing to its remarkable success as a pathogen. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4126748 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-41267482014-08-12 Comparison of Biofilm Formation between Major Clonal Lineages of Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Vanhommerig, Evelyn Moons, Pieter Pirici, Daniel Lammens, Christine Hernalsteens, Jean-Pierre De Greve, Henri Kumar-Singh, Samir Goossens, Herman Malhotra-Kumar, Surbhi PLoS One Research Article OBJECTIVES: Epidemic methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) clones cause infections in both hospital and community settings. As a biofilm phenotype further facilitates evasion of the host immune system and antibiotics, we compared the biofilm-forming capacities of various MRSA clones. METHODS: Seventy-six MRSA classified into 13 clones (USA300, EMRSA-15, Hungarian/Brazilian etc.), and isolated from infections or from carriers were studied for biofilm formation under static and dynamic conditions. Static biofilms in microtitre plates were quantified colorimetrically. Dynamic biofilms (Bioflux 200, Fluxion, USA) were studied by confocal laser-scanning and time-lapse microscopy, and the total volume occupied by live/dead bacteria quantified by Volocity 5.4.1 (Improvision, UK). RESULTS: MRSA harbouring SCCmec IV produced significantly more biomass under static conditions than SCCmec I–III (P = 0.003), and those harbouring SCCmec II significantly less than those harbouring SCCmec I or III (P<0.001). In the dynamic model, SCCmec I–III harbouring MRSA were significantly better biofilm formers than SCCmec IV (P = 0.036). Only 16 strains successfully formed biofilms under both conditions, of which 13 harboured SCCmec IV and included all tested USA300 strains (n = 3). However, USA300 demonstrated remarkably lower percentages of cell-occupied space (6.6%) compared to the other clones (EMRSA-15 = 19.0%) under dynamic conditions. Time-lapse microscopy of dynamic biofilms demonstrated that USA300 formed long viscoelastic tethers that stretched far from the point of attachment, while EMRSA-15 consisted of micro-colonies attached densely to the surface. CONCLUSIONS: MRSA harbouring SCCmec types IV and I–III demonstrate distinct biofilm forming capacities, possibly owing to their adaptation to the community and hospital settings, respectively. USA300 demonstrated abundant biofilm formation under both conditions, which probably confers a competitive advantage, contributing to its remarkable success as a pathogen. Public Library of Science 2014-08-08 /pmc/articles/PMC4126748/ /pubmed/25105505 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0104561 Text en © 2014 Vanhommerig et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Vanhommerig, Evelyn Moons, Pieter Pirici, Daniel Lammens, Christine Hernalsteens, Jean-Pierre De Greve, Henri Kumar-Singh, Samir Goossens, Herman Malhotra-Kumar, Surbhi Comparison of Biofilm Formation between Major Clonal Lineages of Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus |
title | Comparison of Biofilm Formation between Major Clonal Lineages of Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus
|
title_full | Comparison of Biofilm Formation between Major Clonal Lineages of Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus
|
title_fullStr | Comparison of Biofilm Formation between Major Clonal Lineages of Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus
|
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Biofilm Formation between Major Clonal Lineages of Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus
|
title_short | Comparison of Biofilm Formation between Major Clonal Lineages of Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus
|
title_sort | comparison of biofilm formation between major clonal lineages of methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4126748/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25105505 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0104561 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vanhommerigevelyn comparisonofbiofilmformationbetweenmajorclonallineagesofmethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureus AT moonspieter comparisonofbiofilmformationbetweenmajorclonallineagesofmethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureus AT piricidaniel comparisonofbiofilmformationbetweenmajorclonallineagesofmethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureus AT lammenschristine comparisonofbiofilmformationbetweenmajorclonallineagesofmethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureus AT hernalsteensjeanpierre comparisonofbiofilmformationbetweenmajorclonallineagesofmethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureus AT degrevehenri comparisonofbiofilmformationbetweenmajorclonallineagesofmethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureus AT kumarsinghsamir comparisonofbiofilmformationbetweenmajorclonallineagesofmethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureus AT goossensherman comparisonofbiofilmformationbetweenmajorclonallineagesofmethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureus AT malhotrakumarsurbhi comparisonofbiofilmformationbetweenmajorclonallineagesofmethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureus |