| Literature DB >> 25995981 |
Tine De Ryck1, Eline Vanlancker2, Charlotte Grootaert3, Bart I Roman4, Laurens M De Coen4, Isabel Vandenberghe5, Christian V Stevens4, Marc Bracke1, Tom Van de Wiele6, Barbara Vanhoecke6.
Abstract
Awareness of the impact of microbiota in both health and disease is growing. Using a new in vitro oral mucosa co-culture model, we recently showed a clear inhibition of epithelial wound healing in the presence of an oral microbial community. In this paper, we have used the same model in combination with specific oral microbial species to obtain a better insight into the role of the oral microbiota in wound healing. Monocultures of Klebsiella oxytoca and Lactobacillus salivarius significantly inhibited wound healing with ~20%, whereas Streptococcus mitis and S. oralis enhanced the healing process with ~15% in 24 h. Yet, neither S. oralis or S. mitis were able to counteract the inhibitory effects from K. oxytoca on wound healing. Other tested microbial species had no effect on wound healing. Apart from this species-dependency, the inhibitory effect on wound healing depended on a microbial threshold concentration. Further mechanistic experiments with K. oxytoca excluded different microbial factors and hypothesized that quorum sensing molecules might play a role in the inter-kingdom signalling during wound healing. These results are important for the development of new strategies for the management of (infected) wounds and ulcerations.Entities:
Keywords: Co-culture model; Epithelial wound healing; Klebsiella oxytoca; Monocultures; Quorum sensing
Year: 2015 PMID: 25995981 PMCID: PMC4437994 DOI: 10.1186/s13568-015-0116-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: AMB Express ISSN: 2191-0855 Impact factor: 3.298
Figure 1a Wound healing capacity of TR146 epithelial cells confronted with inserts containing 5.5–6 log CFU of monocultures of different oral species. The relative area of the wound after 24 h is plotted (mean + SD; *p < 0.05). The black bars represent data from experiments performed without pre-incubation of the microbial cells on the insert, the white bars represent data from experiments with a 4 h pre-incubation step of the microbiota before confrontation with the epithelial cells. Mean microbial counts of the different species present on the filters after 24 h of co-culture with TR146 epithelial cells are depicted (N.D. = not detected). b Cytokine analysis of the basal conditioned medium. The microbial monocultures of different oral species were pre-incubated for 4 h before confrontation with the TR146 cells for 24 h. Relative concentrations are shown (mean + SD; *p < 0.05).
Figure 2a Concentrations of glucose, l- and d-lactate found in the basal cell culture medium after 24 h of co-culture of the TR146 cells with different oral microbial species (mean ± SD; *p < 0.05). Microbiota were pre-incubated for 4 h on the insert, before they were exposed to the wounded TR146 cells. b Wound healing capacity of TR146 cells in cell culture medium with different glucose concentrations (mean + SD; *p < 0.05). c Wound healing capacity of TR146 cells treated with different d-lactic acid concentrations (mean + SD; *p < 0.05).
Figure 3a Wound healing capacity of TR146 epithelial cells confronted with K. oxytoca alone or mixed with S. salivarius, S. oralis or S. mitis (mean + SD; *p < 0.05). b Microbial counts of K. oxytoca or mixtures of K. oxytoca with S. salivarius, S. oralis or S. mitis present on the insert at time 0 and after 24 h of co-culture with TR146 epithelial cells (mean ± SD).
Figure 4a Wound healing capacity of TR146 epithelial cells in presence of the conditioned medium of K. oxytoca-exposed TR146 cells (mean + SD; *p < 0.05). Leupeptin- or proteinase K-treatment of the conditioned medium was performed as described in “Materials and methods”. b Wound healing capacity of TR146 epithelial cells in presence of different fractions of the K. oxytoca-conditioned medium (mean + SD; *p < 0.05). Full conditioned medium was tested together with three different fractions >10 kDa, 3 kDa < x < 10 kDa and <3 kDa.
Figure 5a Wound healing capacity of TR146 cells treated with different concentrations of tilivalline (mean + SD; *p < 0.05). b Wound healing capacity of TR146 cells exposed to K. oxytoca AHC-6 wild type, the ΔnpsB mutant Mut89 unable to produce tilivalline and the Mut89 with npsB complementation (mean + SD; *p < 0.05). c Microbial counts of the different K. oxytoca strains (AHC-6, Mut 89, Mut89 + npsB) present on the insert at time 0 and after 24 h of co-culture with TR146 epithelial cells (mean ± SD).
Figure 6Wound healing capacity of TR146 cells treated with different concentrations of N-(3-oxododecanoyl)-l-homoserine lactone (AHL) (mean + SD; *p < 0.05).