World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology

, Volume 29, Issue 9, pp 1695–1703 | Cite as

Anti-biofouling property of vanillin on Aeromonas hydrophila initial biofilm on various membrane surfaces

Original Paper
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Biofouling is a serious problem on filter membranes of water purification systems due to formation of bacterial biofilms, which can be detrimental to the membrane performance. Biofouling occurs on membrane surface and therefore greatly influences the physical and chemical aspects of the surface. Several membranes including microfiltration, ultrafiltration, and reverse osmosis (RO) membranes were used to learn about the anti-biofouling properties of vanillin affecting the membrane performances. Vanillin has been recognized as a potential quorum quenching compound for Aeromonas hydrophila biofilms. The initial attachment and dynamics of biofilm growth were monitored using scanning electron microscopy and confocal laser scanning microscopy. Biofilm quantities were measured using a plate count method and total protein determinations. Vanillin addition was effective in the prevention of biofilm formation on the tested membrane surfaces. Among the membranes, RO membranes made with cellulose acetate showed the most substantial reduction of biofilm formation by addition of vanillin. The biofilm reduction was confirmed by the results of surface coverage, biomass and protein accumulation. The HPLC spectrum of the spent culture with vanillin addition showed that vanillin may interfere with quorum sensing molecules and thus prevent the formation of the biofilms.

Keywords

Anti-biofouling Aeromonas hydrophila RO membrane Vanillin Quorum sensing 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Conflict of interest

We declare that we have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Al-Ahmad MI, Aleem FAA, Mutiri A, Ubaisy A (2000) Biofouling in RO membrane systems. Part 1: fundamentals and control. Desalination 132:173–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. AWWA Membrane Technology Research Committee (1998) Committee report: membrane processes. J AWWA 90(6):91–105Google Scholar
  3. Brackman G, Defoirdt T, Miyamoto C, Bossier P, Calenbergh SV, Nelis H, Coenye T (2008) Cinnamaldehyde and cinnamaldehyde derivatives reduce virulence in Vibrio spp. by decreasing the DNA-binding activity of the quorum sensing response regulator LuxR. BMC Microbiol 8:149–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brackman G, Celen S, Hillaert U, Van Calenbergh S, Cos P, Maes L, Nelis HJ, Coenye T (2011) Structure-activity relationship of cinnamaldehyde analogs as inhibitors of AI-2 based quorum sensing and their effect on virulence of Vibrio spp. PLoS ONE 6(1):e16084CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bradford M (1976) A rapid and sensitive method for the quantification of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal Biochem 72:248–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Childress AE, Elimelech M (2000) Relating nanofiltration membrane performance to membrane charge (electrokinetic) characteristics. Environ Sci Technol 34:3710–3716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Choo JH, Rukayadi Y, Hwang JK (2006) Inhibition of bacterial quorum sensing by vanilla extract. Lett Appl Microbiol 42:637–641Google Scholar
  8. Defoirdt T, Miyamoto CM, Wood TK, Meighen EA, Sorgeloos P, Verstraete W, Bossier P (2007) The natural furanone (5Z)-4-bromo-5-(bromomethylene)-3-butyl-2(5H)-furanonedisrupts quorum sensing-regulated gene expression in Vibrio harveyi by decreasing the DNA-binding activity of the transcriptional regulator protein LuxR. Environ Microbiol 9:2486–2495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Der Bruggen BV, Vandecasteele C, van Gestel T, Doyen W, Leysen R (2003) A review of pressure-driven membrane processes in wastewater treatment and drinking water production. Environ Prog 22:46–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gerhardt P, Murray RGE, Wood WA, Krieg NR (eds) (1994) Methods for general and molecular bacteriology. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, pp 45–52Google Scholar
  11. Heydorn A, Nielsen AT, Hentzer M, Sternberg C, Givskov M, Ersboll BK, Molin S (2000) Quantification of biofilm structures by the novel computer program COMSTAT. Microbiology 146:2395–2407Google Scholar
  12. Hoek EMV, Bhattacharjee S, Elimelech M (2003) Effect of membrane surface roughness on colloid.membrane DLVO interactions. Langmuir 19:4836–4847CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ivnitsky H, Katz I, Minz D, Volvovic G, Shimoni E, Kesselman E, Semiat R, Dosoretz CG (2007) Bacterial community composition and structure of biofilms developing on nanofiltration membranes applied to wastewater treatment. Water Res 41:3924–3935CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jucker C, Clark MM (1994) Adsorption of aquatic humic substances on hydrophobic ultrafiltration membranes. J Membr Sci 97:37–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kang ST, Subramani A, Hoek EMV, Deshusses MA, Matsumoto MR (2004) Direct observation of biofouling in cross-flow microfiltration: mechanisms of deposition and release. J Membr Sci 244:151–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kim KJ, Fane AG, Fell CJD, Joy DC (1992) Fouling mechanisms of membranes during protein ultrafiltration. J Membr Sci 68:79–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kumari A, Pasini P, Daunert S (2008) Detection of bacterial quorum sensing N-acylhomoserine lactones in clinical samples. Anal Bioanal Chem 391:1619–1627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lee W, Ahn CH, Hong S, Kim S, Lee S, Baek Y, Yoon J (2010) Evaluation of surface properties of reverse osmosis membranes on the initial biofouling stages under no filtration condition. J Membr Sci 351:112–122Google Scholar
  19. Liu LF, Yu SC, Wu LG, Gao CJ (2006) Study on a novel polyamide-urea reverse osmosis composite membrane (ICIC-MPD) II. Analysis of membrane antifouling performance. J Membr Sci 283:133–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Manatchaya N, Pascal D, Peter T, Tipvanna N, Buncha O, Mazza G (2006) Antimicrobial activity of vanillin against spoilage microorganisms in stored fresh-cut mangoes. J Food Prot 69:1724–1727Google Scholar
  21. Mukherjee D, Kulkarni A, Gill WN (1996) Chemical treatment for improved performance of reverse osmosis membranes. Desalination 104:239–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pasmore M, Todd P, Smith S, Baker D, Silverstein J, Coons D, Bowman CN (2001) Effects of ultrafiltration membrane surface properties on Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilm initiation for the purpose of reducing biofouling. J Membr Sci 194:15–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ponnusamy K, Paul D, Kweon JH (2009) Inhibition of quorum sensing mechanism and Aeromonas hydrophila biofilm formation by vanillin. Environ Eng Sci 26:1359–1363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Redman JA, Walker SL, Elimelech M (2004) Bacterial adhesion and transport in porous media: role of the secondary energy minimum. Environ Sci Technol 38:1777–1785CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rohde H, Burandt EC, Siemssen N, Frommelt L, Burdelski C, Wurster S, Scherpe S, Davies AP, Harris LG, Horstkotte MA, Knobloch JK, Ragunath C, Kaplan JB, Mack D (2007) Polysaccharide intercellular adhesion or protein factors in biofilm accumulation of Staphylococcus epidermidis and Staphylococcus aureus isolated from prosthetic hip and knee joint infections. Biomaterials 28:1711–1720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rosenberg LE, Carbone AL, Romling U, Uhrich KE, Chikindas ML (2008) Salicylic acid-based poly (anhydride esters) for control of biofilm formation in Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium. Appl Microbiol 46:593–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Swift S, Karlyshev AV, Fish L, Durant EL, Winson MK, Chhabra SR, Williams P, MacIntyre S, Stewart GSAB (1997) Quorum sensing in Aeromonas hydrophila and Aeromonas salmonicida: identification of the LuxRI homologs AhyRI and AsaRI and their cognate N-acylhomoserine lactone signal molecules. J Bacteriol 179:5271–5281Google Scholar
  28. Walker SL, Redman JA, Elimelech M (2004) Role of cell surface lipopolysaccharides in Escherichia coli k12 adhesion and transport. Langmuir 20:7736–7746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wang X, Yao X, Zhu Z, Tang T, Dai K, Sadovskaya I, Flahaut S, Jabbouri S (2009) Effect of berberine on Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilm formation. Int J Antimicrob Ag 34:60–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Waters CM, Bassler BL (2005) Quorum sensing: cell-to cell communication in bacteria. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 21:319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Xu P, Drewes JE, Kim TU, Bellona C, Amy G (2006) Effect of membrane fouling on transport of organic contaminants in NF, RO membrane applications. J Membr Sci 279:165–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Environmental EngineeringKonkuk UniversityGwangjin GuRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Department of Biotechnology, School of Science, Engineering and TechnologyIndus International UniversityUnaIndia
  3. 3.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringSejong UniversityGwangjin GuRepublic of Korea
  4. 4.Department Microbial Natural Products, Helmholtz-Institute for Pharmaceutical Research Saarland (HIPS)Saarland UniversitySaarbrückenGermany

Personalised recommendations