The impact of growth conditions on biofilm formation and the cell surface hydrophobicity in fluconazole susceptible and tolerant Candida albicans

. 2015 Jan ; 60 (1) : 45-51. [epub] 20140807

Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké Médium print-electronic

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/pmid25100641

The influence of acidic (5.6) and neutral (7.0) pH and glucose concentrations (0.9 and 2 %) was determined in in vitro biofilm formation and the cell surface hydrophobicity (CSH) in fluconazole (FLC) susceptible and tolerant yeasts of Candida albicans. The determination of biofilm viability using tetrazolium salt XTT showed that both FLC-tolerant C. albicans 1173 and FLC-sensitive C. albicans SC 5314 formed more robust biofilm in the YNB medium at pH 7.0 in the absence of FLC than that at acidic pH. Tested glucose concentrations did not show any direct effect on formation of biofilm under all conditions. However, determination of biofilm dry mass that contains also extracellular matrix suggested some effect of 2 % D-glucose. An increase in CSH (for about 10 %) was estimated in C. albicans SC 5314 in the presence of FLC, while the FLC-tolerant isolate proved a weak increase of CSH only in the YNB media containing 2 % D-glucose. Additionally, strain C. albicans SC 5314 strongly flocculated at neutral pH in the absence of FLC, but this phenomenon was not observed in the presence of FLC. Subinhibitory concentration of FLC influenced biofilm cells and CSH, but FLC susceptibility versus tolerance of C. albicans tested strains did not directly affect biofilm formation and/or CSH.

Zobrazit více v PubMed

J Med Microbiol. 2008 Dec;57(Pt 12):1466-1472 PubMed

Eukaryot Cell. 2004 Apr;3(2):536-45 PubMed

Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2007 Jun;71(2):348-76 PubMed

Mol Biol Cell. 2003 Apr;14(4):1460-7 PubMed

Can J Microbiol. 2009 May;55(5):605-10 PubMed

Mycoses. 2010 May;53(3):221-6 PubMed

Mol Biol Cell. 2009 Nov;20(22):4845-55 PubMed

PLoS One. 2012;7(3):e33705 PubMed

Infect Immun. 1994 Mar;62(3):915-21 PubMed

Mycoses. 2010 Nov;53(6):475-80 PubMed

Can J Microbiol. 2008 Sep;54(9):718-24 PubMed

Nat Rev Microbiol. 2004 Jul;2(7):533-40 PubMed

Mol Gen Genet. 1984;198(2):179-82 PubMed

Biol Pharm Bull. 2006 May;29(5):923-6 PubMed

Proteomics. 2004 Aug;4(8):2425-36 PubMed

Fungal Genet Biol. 2009 Feb;46(2):126-36 PubMed

FEMS Yeast Res. 2006 Nov;6(7):979-86 PubMed

Folia Microbiol (Praha). 2013 May;58(3):235-43 PubMed

Curr Microbiol. 2005 Aug;51(2):100-4 PubMed

Mol Biol Cell. 2008 Oct;19(10):4393-403 PubMed

Cell Microbiol. 2012 Sep;14(9):1319-35 PubMed

Eukaryot Cell. 2007 Oct;6(10):1736-44 PubMed

J Med Microbiol. 2007 Jul;56(Pt 7):1003-1004 PubMed

PLoS One. 2012;7(3):e32467 PubMed

Folia Microbiol (Praha). 2011 Mar;56(2):116-21 PubMed

Microbiology (Reading). 2012 Sep;158(Pt 9):2272-2282 PubMed

J Med Microbiol. 2011 Sep;60(Pt 9):1261-1269 PubMed

Nature. 2009 Jul 9;460(7252):220-4 PubMed

Mol Microbiol. 2006 Apr;60(1):5-15 PubMed

Appl Environ Microbiol. 2009 Jun;75(11):3663-72 PubMed

J Med Microbiol. 2008 Oct;57(Pt 10):1277-1281 PubMed

Curr Opin Microbiol. 1998 Dec;1(6):687-92 PubMed

J Dent. 2012 Aug;40(8):686-92 PubMed

Mycoses. 2009 Mar;52(2):118-28 PubMed

Infect Immun. 1985 Oct;50(1):97-101 PubMed

Pharmazie. 2004 Jul;59(7):573-4 PubMed

Eukaryot Cell. 2009 Sep;8(9):1314-20 PubMed

Mol Microbiol. 2002 Dec;46(5):1345-51 PubMed

J Antimicrob Chemother. 2007 Mar;59(3):441-50 PubMed

Microbiology (Reading). 2003 Feb;149(Pt 2):353-362 PubMed

Microbiology (Reading). 2007 Oct;153(Pt 10):3211-3217 PubMed

FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2000 Feb 1;183(1):89-94 PubMed

Mol Microbiol. 2008 May;68(3):535-7 PubMed

Eukaryot Cell. 2011 Oct;10(10):1370-4 PubMed

Fungal Genet Biol. 2008 Apr;45(4):485-97 PubMed

PLoS One. 2012;7(6):e39812 PubMed

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...