Cargando…

A comparison of conventional methods for the quantification of bacterial cells after exposure to metal oxide nanoparticles

BACKGROUND: Due to potential interference of nanoparticles on bacterial quantification, there is a challenge to develop a fast, accurate and reproducible method for bacterial quantification. Currently various bacterial quantification methods are used by researchers performing nanoparticles study, bu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pan, Hongmiao, Zhang, Yongbin, He, Gui-Xin, Katagori, Namrata, Chen, Huizhong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4236543/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25138641
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12866-014-0222-6
_version_ 1782345186134720512
author Pan, Hongmiao
Zhang, Yongbin
He, Gui-Xin
Katagori, Namrata
Chen, Huizhong
author_facet Pan, Hongmiao
Zhang, Yongbin
He, Gui-Xin
Katagori, Namrata
Chen, Huizhong
author_sort Pan, Hongmiao
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Due to potential interference of nanoparticles on bacterial quantification, there is a challenge to develop a fast, accurate and reproducible method for bacterial quantification. Currently various bacterial quantification methods are used by researchers performing nanoparticles study, but there has been no efficacy evaluation of these methods. Here we study interference of nanoparticles on three most commonly used conventional bacterial quantification methods, including colony counting to determine the colony-forming units (CFU), spectrophotometer method of optical density (OD) measurement, and flow cytometry (FCM). RESULTS: Three oxide nanoparticles including ZnO, TiO(2), and SiO(2) and four bacterial species including Salmonella enterica serovar Newport, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Enterococcus faecalis, and Escherichia coli were included in the test. Results showed that there is no apparent interference of the oxide nanoparticles on quantifications of all four bacterial species by FCM measurement; CFU counting is time consuming, less accurate and not suitable for automation; and the spectrophotometer method using OD measurement was the most unreliable method to quantify and detect the bacteria in the presence of the nanoparticles. CONCLUSION: In summary, FCM measurement proved to be the best method, which is suitable for rapid, accurate and automatic detection of bacteria in the presence of the nanoparticles.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4236543
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42365432014-11-19 A comparison of conventional methods for the quantification of bacterial cells after exposure to metal oxide nanoparticles Pan, Hongmiao Zhang, Yongbin He, Gui-Xin Katagori, Namrata Chen, Huizhong BMC Microbiol Research Article BACKGROUND: Due to potential interference of nanoparticles on bacterial quantification, there is a challenge to develop a fast, accurate and reproducible method for bacterial quantification. Currently various bacterial quantification methods are used by researchers performing nanoparticles study, but there has been no efficacy evaluation of these methods. Here we study interference of nanoparticles on three most commonly used conventional bacterial quantification methods, including colony counting to determine the colony-forming units (CFU), spectrophotometer method of optical density (OD) measurement, and flow cytometry (FCM). RESULTS: Three oxide nanoparticles including ZnO, TiO(2), and SiO(2) and four bacterial species including Salmonella enterica serovar Newport, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Enterococcus faecalis, and Escherichia coli were included in the test. Results showed that there is no apparent interference of the oxide nanoparticles on quantifications of all four bacterial species by FCM measurement; CFU counting is time consuming, less accurate and not suitable for automation; and the spectrophotometer method using OD measurement was the most unreliable method to quantify and detect the bacteria in the presence of the nanoparticles. CONCLUSION: In summary, FCM measurement proved to be the best method, which is suitable for rapid, accurate and automatic detection of bacteria in the presence of the nanoparticles. BioMed Central 2014-08-21 /pmc/articles/PMC4236543/ /pubmed/25138641 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12866-014-0222-6 Text en Copyright © 2014 Pan et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Pan, Hongmiao
Zhang, Yongbin
He, Gui-Xin
Katagori, Namrata
Chen, Huizhong
A comparison of conventional methods for the quantification of bacterial cells after exposure to metal oxide nanoparticles
title A comparison of conventional methods for the quantification of bacterial cells after exposure to metal oxide nanoparticles
title_full A comparison of conventional methods for the quantification of bacterial cells after exposure to metal oxide nanoparticles
title_fullStr A comparison of conventional methods for the quantification of bacterial cells after exposure to metal oxide nanoparticles
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of conventional methods for the quantification of bacterial cells after exposure to metal oxide nanoparticles
title_short A comparison of conventional methods for the quantification of bacterial cells after exposure to metal oxide nanoparticles
title_sort comparison of conventional methods for the quantification of bacterial cells after exposure to metal oxide nanoparticles
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4236543/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25138641
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12866-014-0222-6
work_keys_str_mv AT panhongmiao acomparisonofconventionalmethodsforthequantificationofbacterialcellsafterexposuretometaloxidenanoparticles
AT zhangyongbin acomparisonofconventionalmethodsforthequantificationofbacterialcellsafterexposuretometaloxidenanoparticles
AT heguixin acomparisonofconventionalmethodsforthequantificationofbacterialcellsafterexposuretometaloxidenanoparticles
AT katagorinamrata acomparisonofconventionalmethodsforthequantificationofbacterialcellsafterexposuretometaloxidenanoparticles
AT chenhuizhong acomparisonofconventionalmethodsforthequantificationofbacterialcellsafterexposuretometaloxidenanoparticles
AT panhongmiao comparisonofconventionalmethodsforthequantificationofbacterialcellsafterexposuretometaloxidenanoparticles
AT zhangyongbin comparisonofconventionalmethodsforthequantificationofbacterialcellsafterexposuretometaloxidenanoparticles
AT heguixin comparisonofconventionalmethodsforthequantificationofbacterialcellsafterexposuretometaloxidenanoparticles
AT katagorinamrata comparisonofconventionalmethodsforthequantificationofbacterialcellsafterexposuretometaloxidenanoparticles
AT chenhuizhong comparisonofconventionalmethodsforthequantificationofbacterialcellsafterexposuretometaloxidenanoparticles