It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Selecting appropriate tools providing reliable quantitative measures of individual populations in biofilms is critical as we now recognize their true polymicrobial and heterogeneous nature. Here, plate count, quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (q-PCR) and peptide nucleic acid probe-fluorescence in situ hybridization (PNA-FISH) were employed to quantitate cystic fibrosis multispecies biofilms. Growth of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Inquilinus limosus and Dolosigranulum pigrum was assessed in dual- and triple-species consortia under oxygen and antibiotic stress. Quantification methods, that were previously optimized and validated in planktonic consortia, were not always in agreement when applied in multispecies biofilms. Discrepancies in culture and molecular outcomes were observed, particularly for triple-species consortia and antibiotic-stressed biofilms. Some differences were observed, such as the higher bacterial counts obtained by q-PCR and/or PNA-FISH (≤4 log10 cells/cm2) compared to culture. But the discrepancies between PNA-FISH and q-PCR data (eg D. pigrum limited assessment by q-PCR) demonstrate the effect of biofilm heterogeneity in method’s reliability. As the heterogeneity in biofilms is a reflection of a myriad of variables, tailoring an accurate picture of communities´ changes is crucial. This work demonstrates that at least two, but preferentially three, quantification techniques are required to obtain reliable measures and take comprehensive analysis of polymicrobial biofilm-associated infections.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Centre of Biological Engineering, LIBRO – Laboratório de Investigação em Biofilmes Rosário Oliveira, University of Minho, Campus de Gualtar, Braga, Portugal
2 LEPABE – Dep. of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto, Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, s/n, Porto, Portugal