| Literature DB >> 35163499 |
Bassam A Elgamoudi1, Victoria Korolik1,2.
Abstract
Reproducible qualitative and quantitative assessment of bacterial chemotactic motility, particularly in response to chemorepellent effectors, is experimentally challenging. Here we compare several established chemotaxis assays currently used to investigate Campylobacter jejuni chemotaxis, with the aim of improving the correlation between different studies and establishing the best practices. We compare the methodologies of capillary, agar, and chamber-based assays, and discuss critical technical points, in terms of reproducibility, accuracy, and the advantages and limitations of each.Entities:
Keywords: Campylobacter jejuni; chemoeffector screening; chemotaxis; chemotaxis assays
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35163499 PMCID: PMC8836060 DOI: 10.3390/ijms23031576
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Advantages and disadvantages of common chemotaxis assays. M- Molar, mM- Millimolar.
| Method | Detection Time | Molar Concentration | Advantages | Disadvantages | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agar-based assays | |||||
| Hard-plug agar assay (HAP assay) | 3 h | 10–100 mM | -Easy to prepare. | -Chemorepellent taxis are difficult to observe. | [ |
| Modified hard-plug agar assay (t-HAP assay) | 10 min to 3 h | 10–100 mM | -Easy to prepare. | -Chemorepellent taxis are difficult to observe. | [ |
| Nutrient-depletion assay | 3–6 h | 2–10 mM | -Gives quantitative data. | -Sensitive to any motions around the assays. | [ |
| Tube-based assay | 75 h | 1 M | -Easy to prepare. | -Not suitable for studying chemorepellents. | [ |
| Capillary assay | |||||
| Capillary assay | 1 h | 10–100 mM | -Gives quantitative data. | -Not suitable for studying chemorepellents. | [ |
| Chemotaxis chamber | |||||
| μ-slide chemotaxis chamber | 3 h | 5–10 mM | -Ideal to study the behaviour of a single cell. | -One strain and condition can be monitored per assay. | [ |
Chemotaxis assays of wild-type C. jejuni strains 11168-O (11168-O WT), and Tlp10LBD mutant (Δtlp10) (from [39]). The viable count (Log10 CFU/mL) differences between t-HAP, Nutrient-depletion and μ-slide assays of 11168-O WT, Δtlp10.
| Ligands | t-HAP | Nutrient-Depletion Assay | μ-Slide Assays | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11168-O WT | Δ | 11168-O WT | Δ | 11168-O WT | Δ | |
| fucose | 6.7 ± 0.61 | 5.3 ± 0.02 | 5.8 ± 0.63 | 3.86 ± 0.43 | 4.96 ± 0.39 | 3.61 ± 0.08 |
| isoleucine | 6.6 ± 0.34 | 5.9 ± 0.18 | 5.7 ± 0.4 | 4 ± 0.61 | 6.61 ± 0.33 | 5.52 ± 0.17 |
| aspartate | 6.38 ± 0.4 | 5.33 ± 0.22 | 5.61 ± 0.93 | 3.32 ± 0.18 | 5.71± 0.4 | 4.21 ± 0.16 |
Figure 1Schematic representation of the tHAP assay showing how t-HAP assesses both the positive and negative chemotactic responses of C. jejuni. The chemoresponse of the wild-type C. jejuni after 3 h incubation under microaerobic conditions at 42 °C with 100 mM of chemoattractant (serine), chemorepellent (arginine), and a mix of chemoattractant/chemorepellent (serine/arginine), from [26].
Figure 2Time-lapse imaging of fluorescently labelled migrating C. jejuni 11168-O cells (from [39]). (1) Attractant response of WT (11168-O) toward 10 mM isoleucine. (2) Repellent response of WT (11168-O) cells partially migrated toward 10 mM isoleucine from the left chamber of μ-Slide, followed by the introduction of 10 mM arginine into the right chamber at 20 s. Scale bar = 100 µm.