| Literature DB >> 20169626 |
Yuka Ishihara1, Mamoru Hyodo, Yoshihiro Hayakawa, Taichi Kamegaya, Keiko Yamada, Akira Okamoto, Tadao Hasegawa, Michio Ohta.
Abstract
Cyclic bis(3'-5')diguanylic acid (cyclic-di-GMP) functions as a second messenger in diverse species of bacteria to trigger wide-ranging physiological changes. We measured cyclic-di-GMP and its structural analogs such as cyclic bis(3'-5')guanylic/adenylic acid (cyclic-GpAp), cyclic bis(3'-5')guanylic/inosinic acid (cyclic-GpIp) and monophosphorothioic acid of cyclic-di-GMP (cyclic-GpGps) for effects on the biofilm formation of Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. We constructed a knockout mutant of SA0701, which is a GGDEF motif protein relevant to diguanylate cyclase from S. aureus 2507. We confirmed that the biofilm formation of this mutant (MS2507 Delta SA0701) was reduced. Cyclic-di-GMP corresponding to physiological intracellular levels given in the culture recovered the biofilm formation of MS2507 Delta SA0701, whereas its analogs did not, indicating that unlike a previous suggestion, cyclic-di-GMP was involved in the positive regulation of the biofilm formation of S. aureus and its action was structurally specific. At a high concentration (200 microM), cyclic-di-GMP and its analogs showed suppression effects on the biofilm formation of S. aureus and P. aeruginosa, and according to the quantification study using costat analysis, the suppression potential was in the order of cyclic-di-GMP, cyclic-GpGps, cyclic-GpAp and cyclic-GpIp, suggesting that the suppression effect was not strictly specific and the change of base structure quantitatively affected the suppression activity.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2009 PMID: 20169626 PMCID: PMC2784870 DOI: 10.1111/j.1574-6968.2009.01825.x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: FEMS Microbiol Lett ISSN: 0378-1097 Impact factor: 2.742
Fig. 1Structure of c-di-GMP and its analogs. B in c-GpAp represents adenine, B in c-GpIp represents inosine, and X in c-GpGps represents S.
Fig. 2Biofilm formation of MS2507 and MS2507ΔSA0701, and effects of cyclic-di-GMP and its analogs. (a) Biofilm formation at 30°C 12 h of MS2507 and MS2507ΔSA0701 in TSB was measured using the crystal violet staining method. The biofilm formation of MS2507ΔSA0701 was moderately lower than that of the parent. (b) Biofilm formation of MS2507ΔSA0701 was measured by the presence of cyclic-di-GMP and its analogs. Only cyclic-di-GMP at low concentrations enhanced the biofilm formation of MS2507ΔSA0701. *P<0.05; **P<0.01.
Fig. 3Quantitative analysis of the suppressive effect of cyclic-di-GMP and its analogs on Staphylococcus aureus biofilm formation (a) and on Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilm formation (b) using the crystal violet staining method. The biofilm of S. aureus MS2507 and P. aeruginosa PAO1 was formed on wells of a polystyrene microplate. The media for biofilm formation were supplemented with indicated concentrations of synthetic cyclic-di-GMP and its analogs. After the incubation, the biofilm formed on the surface of wells was stained with crystal violet. The dye staining the biofilm was then extracted and the OD570 nm was measured. Relative values of each culture to the control culture containing none of the synthetic cyclic-di-GMP and its analogs are presented in the figure. *P<0.05; **P<0.01; ***P<0.001.
Quantitative analysis of MS2507 biofilm formed in the presence of cyclic-di-GMP and its analogs.
| Materials | Biomass (μm3 μm−2) | Average thickness (μm) | Maximum thickness (μm) | Roughness coefficient | Surface/volume ratio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| c-di-GMP | 0.220 ± 0.056 | 0.011 ± 0.003 | 1.250 ± 0.500 | 1.978 ± 0.012 | 3.639 ± 0.494 |
| c-GpGps | 0.229 ± 0.001 | 0.015 ± 0.012 | 1.250 ± 0.500 | 1.970 ± 0.024 | 3.605 ± 0.469 |
| c-GpAp | 1.184 ± 0.159 | 0.704 ± 0.170 | 4.500 ± 0.577 | 1.129 ± 0.087 | 2.153 ± 0.289 |
| c-GpIp | 1.614 ± 0.289 | 1.008 ± 0.308 | 4.000 ± 0.000 | 0.750 ± 0.093 | 1.714 ± 0.116 |
| No treatment | 1.735 ± 0.548 | 1.143 ± 0.507 | 3.750 ± 0.957 | 0.913 ± 0.109 | 1.802 ± 0.239 |
The analysis of image stacks was conducted using the comstat program. Results represent the mean ± SD and P-values refer to comparison with no treatment biofilm.
P<0.05.
P<0.001.
Quantitative analysis of PAO1 biofilm formed in the presence of cyclic-di-GMP and its analogs
| Materials | Biomass (μm3 μm−2) | Average thickness (μm) | Maximum thickness (μm) | Roughness coefficient | Surface/volume ratio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| c-di-GMP | 0.444 ± 0.193 | 0.223 ± 0.158 | 5.400 ± 0.548 | 1.681 ± 0.191 | 3.303 ± 0.206 |
| c-GpGps | 0.453 ± 0.125 | 0.273 ± 0.131 | 4.600 ± 1.140 | 1.677 ± 0.095 | 3.549 ± 0.240 |
| c-GpAp | 1.054 ± 0.595 | 0.773 ± 0.493 | 6.400 ± 1.140 | 1.298 ± 0.354 | 2.858 ± 0.356 |
| c-GpIp | 2.618 ± 0.451 | 2.343 ± 0.570 | 11.167 ± 2.483 | 0.638 ± 0.091 | 2.105 ± 0.125 |
| No treatment | 2.098 ± 0.297 | 1.944 ± 0.438 | 16.200 ± 0.837 | 0.967 ± 0.095 | 2.300 ± 0.107 |
The analysis of image stacks was conducted using the comstat program. Results represent the mean ± SD and P-values refer to comparison with no treatment biofilm.
P<0.05.
P<0.01.
P<0.001.