Skip to main content
Log in

Assessing the Contamination Potential of Freshly Extracted Escherichia coli Biofilm Cells by Impedancemetry

  • Published:
Microbial Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Planktonic bacteria passing to a sessile state during the formation of a biofilm undergo many gene expression and phenotypic changes. These transformations require a significant time to establish. Inversely, cells extracted from a biofilm should also require a significant time before acquiring the same physiological characteristics as planktonic cells. Relatively few studies have addressed the kinetics of this inverse transformation process. We tested one aspect, namely, the contamination potential of freshly extracted Escherichia coli biofilm cells, precultured in a synthetic medium, in a rich liquid growth medium. We compared the time between inoculation and the beginning of the growth phase of freshly extracted biofilm cells, and suspended exponential and suspended stationary phase cells precultured in the same synthetic medium. Unexpectedly, the lag time for the extracted biofilm cells was the same as the lag time of the suspended exponential phase cells and significantly less than the lag time of the suspended stationary phase cells. The lag times were determined by an impedance technique. Cells extracted from biofilms, i.e., biofilms formed in canalizations and broken up by hydrodynamic forces, are an important source of contamination. Our work shows, in the case of E. coli, the high potential of freshly extracted biofilm cells to reinfect a new medium.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Baillie, GS, Douglas, LJ (1998) Effect of growth rate on resistance of Candida Albicans biofilms to antifungal agents. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 42: 1900–1905

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Beloin, C, Valle, J, Latour-Lambert, P, Faure, P, Kzreminski, M, Balestrino, D, Haagensen, JAJ, Molin, S, Prensier, G, Arbeille, B, Ghigo, JM (2004) Global impact of mature biofilm lifestyle on Escherichia coli K-12 gene expression. Mol Microbiol 51: 659–674

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Brooun, A, Liu, S, Lewis, K (2000) A dose response study of antibiotic resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 44: 640–646

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Costerton, JW, Lewandowski, Z, Caldwell, DE, Lappin-Scott, HM (1995) Microbial biofilms. Annu Rev Microbiol 49: 711–745

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Davies, D (2003) Understanding biofilm resistance to antibacterial agents. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2: 114–122

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. De Beer, D, Stoodley, P, Roe, F, Lewandowski, Z (1994) Effects of biofilm structure on oxygen distribution and mass transport. Biotechnol Bioeng 43: 1131–1138

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gilbert, P, Collier, PJ, Brown, MR (1990) Influence of growth rate on susceptibility to antimicrobial agents: biofilms, cell cycle, dormancy and stringent response. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 34: 1865–1868

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Kaplan, JB, Meyenhofer, MF, Fine, DH (2003) Biofilm growth and detachment of Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans. J Bacteriol 185: 1399–1405

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. McLeod, BR, Fortun, S, Costerton, JW, Stewart, PS (1996) Enhanced bacterial biofilm control using electromagnetic fields in combination with antibiotics. Methods Enzymol 310: 656–670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Rice, AR, Hamilton, MA, Camper, AK (2000) Apparent surface associated lag time in growth of primary biofilm cells. Microb Ecol 40: 8–15

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Rice, AR, Hamilton, MA, Camper, AK (2003) Movement, replication, and emigration rates of individual bacteria in a biofilm. Microb Ecol 45: 163–172

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Shigata, MG, Komatsuzawa, M, Sugai, M, Suginaka, H, Usui, T (1997) Effect of the growth rate of Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms on the susceptibility to antimicrobial agents. Chemotherapy 43: 137–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Siegel, S, Castellan, NJ (1988) Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioural Sciences, 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  14. Silley, P, Mortimer, F (2003) Rapid Microbiological Technologies in the Pharmaceutical Industry. Ed. M.C. Easter, Interpharm/CRC, New York

  15. Sternberg, C, Christensen, BB, Johansen, T, Nielsen, AT, Andersen, JB, Giskov, M, Molin, S (1999) Distribution of bacterial growth activity in flow chamber biofilms. Appl Environ Microbiol 65: 4108–4117

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Stoodley, P, Wilson, S, Hall-Stoodley, L, Boyle, JD, Lappin-Scott, H, Costerton, JW (2001) Growth and detachment of cell clusters from mature mixed species biofilms. Appl Environ Microbiol 67: 5608–5613

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Tanaka, G (1999) Effect of the growth rate of Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms on the susceptibility to antimicrobial agents: beta-lactams and fluoroquinolones. Chemotherapy 45: 28–36

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Telgmann, U, Horn, H, Morgenroth, E (2004) Influence of growth history on sloughing and erosion from biofilms. Water Res 38: 3671–3684

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Van Houdt, R, Michiels, CW (2005) Role of bacterial cell surface structures in Escherichia coli biofilm formation. Res Microbiol 156: 626–633

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

W.J. Ellison and J.M. Moreau would like to thank Pr. A. Deschamps, Director of USMA, for permission to use his laboratory facilities. The authors are grateful to the European ERASMUS program, which encourages the mobility of young research workers.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. Caubet.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Caubet, R., Pedarros-Caubet, F., Quataert, Y. et al. Assessing the Contamination Potential of Freshly Extracted Escherichia coli Biofilm Cells by Impedancemetry. Microb Ecol 52, 239–243 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-006-9118-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-006-9118-9

Keywords

Navigation