Abstract
Different methods to analyze Streptococcus agalactiae biofilm formation have been investigated, but standardized protocols have not been developed. We compared S. agalactiae biofilm production among different atmospheres and growth media. Biofilm formation was studied in 32 isolates from bovine mastitis cases grown in Tryptone Soy Broth (TSB), Todd Hewitt Broth (THB), Luria Bertani Broth (LB) and Brain Heart Infusion (BHI), under two atmospheres, aerobic and 5% CO2. Regardless of the culture medium, growth under 5% CO2 resulted in a greater proportion of biofilm formation (65.63%), as compared with aerobic conditions (39.84%). Regardless of the atmosphere, the chances of biofilm formation were greater for isolates grown in TSB, as compared with THB [Odds ratio (OR) = 3.02], BHI (OR = 4.57), or LB (OR = 10.20). Thus, we suggest the use of 5% CO2 atmosphere and TSB in biofilm formation assays by Group-B streptococci (GBS) isolated from intramammary infections.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Almeida AP, Albuquerque PF, Araújo R, Ribeiro N, Tavares FV (2013) Detection and discrimination of common bovine mastitis-causing streptococci. Vet Microbiol 164:3–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetmic.2013.03.011
Bonsaglia EC, Gomes MS, Canisso IF, Zhou Z, Lima SF, Rall VL, Oikonomou G, Bicalho RC, Lima FS (2017) Milk microbiome and bacterial load following dry cow therapy without antibiotics in dairy cows with healthy mammary gland. Sci Rep 7:8067. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-08790-5
Cramton SE, Ulrich M, Götz F, Döring G (2001) Anaerobic conditions induce expression of polysaccharide intercellular adhesin in Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis. Infect Immun 69:4079–4085. https://doi.org/10.1128/IAI.69.6.4079-4085.2001
Di Pippo F, Di Gregorio L, Congestri R, Tandoi V, Rossetti S (2018) Biofilm growth and control in cooling water industrial systems. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 94:5. https://doi.org/10.1093/femsec/fiy044
Ho YR, Li CM, Yu CH, Lin YJ, Wu CM, Harn IC, Tang MJ, Chen YT, Shen FC, Lu CY, Tsai TC, Wu JJ (2013) The enhancement of biofilm formation in Group B streptococcal isolates at vaginal pH. Med Microbiol Immunol 202:105–115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00430-012-0255-0
Jefferson KK (2004) What drives bacteria to produce a biofilm? FEMS Microbiol Lett 236:163–173. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6968.2004.tb09643.x
Kaur H, Kumar P, Ray P, Kaur J, Chakraborti A (2009) Biofilm formation in clinical isolates of group B streptococci from north India. Microb Pathog 46:321–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micpath.2009.04.004
Konto-Ghiorghi Y, Mairey E, Mallet A, Dumenil G, Caliot E, Trieu-Cuot P, Dramsi S (2009) Dual role for pilus in adherence to epithelial cells and biofilm formation in Streptococcus agalactiae. PLoS Pathog 5:e1000422. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1000422
Martins ER, Melo-Cristino J, Ramirez M (2010) Evidence for rare capsular switching in Streptococcus agalactiae. J Bacteriol 192:1361–1369. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.01130-09
Melchior MB, Vaarkamp H, Fink-Gremmels J (2006) Biofilms: a role in recurrent mastitis infections? Vet J 171:398–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tvjl.2005.01.006
Miranda PSD, Lannes-Costa OS, Pimentel BAS, Silva LG, Ferreira-Carvalho BT, Menezes GC, Mattos-Guaraldi AL, Hirata R Jr, Mota RA, Nagao PE (2018) Biofilm formation on different pH conditions by Streptococcus agalactiae isolated from bovine mastitic milk. Lett Appl Microbiol 67:235–243. https://doi.org/10.1111/lam.13015
Oikonomou G, Machado VS, Santisteban C, Schukken YH, Bicalho RC (2012) Microbial diversity of bovine mastitic milk as described by pyrosequencing of metagenomic 16s rDNA. PLoS ONE 7:e47671. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0047671
Rosini R, Margarit I (2015) Biofilm formation by Streptococcus agalactiae: influence of environmental conditions and implicated virulence factors. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 5:6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2015.00006
Rossi R, Amarante AS, Correia LBM, Guerra S, Nobrega DB, Latosinski GS, Rossi BF, Rall VLM, Pantoja JCF (2018) Diagnostic accuracy of Somaticell, California Mastitis Test, and microbiological examination of composite milk to detect Streptococcus agalactiae intramammary infections. J Dairy Sci 18:30768–30769. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2018-14753
Santos AL, Pires ACS, Behaine JJS, Araújo EA, Andrade NJ, Carvalho AF (2013) Effect of cleaning treatment on adhesion of Streptococcus agalactiae to milking machine surfaces. Food Bioprocess Technol 6:1868. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11947-011-0665-9
Stepanovic S, Vukovic D, Dakic I, Savic B, Svabic-Vlahovic M (2000) A modified microtiter-plate test for quantification of staphylococcal biofilm formation. J Microbiol Methods 40:175–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-7012(00)00122-6
Uribe-Alvarez C, Chiquete-Félix N, Contreras-Zentella M, Guerrero-Castillo S, Peña A, Uribe-Carvajal S (2016) Staphylococcus epidermidis: metabolic adaptation and biofilm formation in response to different oxygen concentrations. Pathog Dis 74:1. https://doi.org/10.1093/femspd/ftv111
Yang Q, Porter AJ, Zhang M, Harrington DJ, Black GW, Sutcliffe IC (2012) The impact of pH and nutrient stress on the growth and survival of Streptococcus agalactiae. Antonie Leeuwenhoek 102:277–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10482-012-9736-9
Yang X, Wang H, He A, Tran F (2018) Biofilm formation and susceptibility to biocides of recurring and transient Escherichia coli isolated from meat fabrication equipment. Food Control 90:205e211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Additional information
Communicated by Erko Stackebrandt.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bonsaglia, E.C.R., Latosinski, G.S., Rossi, R.S. et al. Biofilm production under different atmospheres and growth media by Streptococcus agalactiae isolated from milk of cows with subclinical mastitis. Arch Microbiol 202, 209–212 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00203-019-01727-8
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00203-019-01727-8