| Literature DB >> 26558175 |
Suman Halder1, Kirendra Kumar Yadav1, Ratul Sarkar1, Sudipta Mukherjee1, Pritam Saha1, Saubhik Haldar2, Sanmoy Karmakar1, Tuhinadri Sen1.
Abstract
In the present study, we have tried to establish the correlation between changes in Zeta potential with that of cell surface permeability using bacteria (Escherichia coli andEntities:
Keywords: Cell viability; Membrane permeability; Polydispersity index (PDI); Zeta potential
Year: 2015 PMID: 26558175 PMCID: PMC4633473 DOI: 10.1186/s40064-015-1476-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Springerplus ISSN: 2193-1801
Fig. 1Change in bacterial (a, c E. coli: b, d S. aureus) Zeta potential and membrane permeability (assayed by NPN uptake) in presence of different concentrations of CTAB (a, b) and polymyxin B (c, d). Percentage change in Zeta potential (solid lines) and percentage change in permeability (dashed lines) was plotted against the concentration (µg/ml) of the treatment
Fig. 2Change in bacterial (a, b E. coli; c, d S. aureus) membrane permeability (assayed by crystal violet uptake) in presence of different concentrations of CTAB (a, c) and polymyxin B (b, d). Percentage of crystal violet uptake was plotted against the concentration (µg/ml) of the treatment
The polydispersity index (measured by DLS) and viability of cells (expressed as CFU) after treatment with and without CTAB
| Treatment | log(CFU) | Polydispersity index | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Normal bacterial cell | 9.14 ± 0.10 | 8.41 ± 0.24 | 0.31 ± 0.019 | 0.28 ± 0.023 |
| Cell treated with 0.3 µg/ml CTAB | 9.04 ± 0.52 | 8.05 ± 0.35 | 0.32 ± 0.032 | 0.29 ± 0.016 |
| Cell treated with 30 µg/ml CTAB | 5.06 ± 0.52** | 4.02 ± 0.44** | 0.75 ± 0.023** | 0.79 ± 0.014** |
Values are expressed as mean ± SEM; (n = 6)
** p < 0.01 (vs. control)
Fig. 3E. coli (a, b) and S. aureus (c, d) cells were treated with different concentrations of CTAB (a, c) and ampicillin (b, d). Viability of the cells is the common parameter which has changed in a dose dependent manner for both of the agents, thus percentage change in Zeta potential (ZP; dashed red line) and percentage change in permeability (solid black line) was plotted against percentage of viable cells
Zeta potential (mV) and mean fluorescence intensity of normal, heat treated and autoclaved E. coli and S. aureus
| Treatment | Zeta potential (mV) | Fluorescence intensity (NPN uptake) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Normal bacterial cell | −44.2 ± 0.50 | −35.6 ± 0.54 | 975 ± 55.49 | 855 ± 60.83 |
| Heat treatment for 10 min at 100 °C | −33.9 ± 0.81** | −35.13 ± 0.60 | 1248 ± 138.82** | 872 ± 62.96 |
| Heat treatment for 30 min at 100 °C | −21.1 ± 0.62** | −27.6 ± 0.54** | 1543 ± 76.01** | 1209 ± 70.34** |
Values are expressed as mean ± SEM; (n = 6)
The respective values of Zeta potential and NPN assay of normal, heat treated and autoclaved E. coli and S. aureus
The data are the means ± the standard deviations (n = 6)
** p < 0.01. (vs. control)
Fig. 4Bacterial cell suspension (CTAB 30 µg/ml and untreated Blank) stained with Syto-9 and PI analysed by CLSM. Cells with intact cell surface (membrane undisturbed) stained fluorescent green, whereas cells with ruptured surface (altered membrane integrity) stained fluorescent red. The overlap of the red and greens appear as orange