Advertisement

Bacterial Cell-Mineral Interface, Its Impacts on Biofilm Formation and Bioremediation

  • Hamid M. Pouran
Reference work entry

Abstract

This chapter aims to provide a better understanding of the bacterial cell attachment and biofilm formation on the mineral surfaces, which would result in improving our knowledge about: the interfacial forces governing the bacterial cell attachment, predicting trends of the biofilm formation and consequently biodegradation rates, and the contaminant’s fate in the diverse geological media (Pouran HM. Studying molecular and nanoscale interactions at metal oxide surfaces and their effects on bacterial adhesion, 2009).

In both aqueous and terrestrial environments, bacterial cells tend to be attached to a surface and form biofilm. If they are associated to, e.g., a mineral surface, bacterial cells would remain in a more stable microenvironment instead of being removed by the water shear stress. Even the bacterial planktonic phase can be considered as a mechanism for translocation from one surface to the other rather than a prime lifestyle (Watnick and Kolter 2000; Young 2006). The biofilm formation, which completely covers the surface, initially begins by the adhesion of a small quantity of cells (Vadillo-rodri et al. 2006; Pouran et al. 2017).

Among the different indigenous microbial species in the contaminated environments, some are capable of degrading pollutants and participating in the environmental remediation process. The bioremediation process of the contaminated soils and waters is often considered a promising low risk management tool. Even when the contamination poses an imminent threat and other approaches are essential, bioremediation often is a viable secondary strategy for the site maintenance (Haws et al. 2006; Pouran et al. 2017).

Natural environments are dynamic and complex systems; therefore, characterization and identifying the underlying processes governing the contaminant’s fate are not easy. Examples of the natural environments heterogeneity are the diverse physicochemical properties of the soils and aquifers matrices (Stumm and Morgan 1996). As the soils and sediments are the prime surfaces for the bacterial cell attachment in most natural environments, elucidation of the surface properties of these constituents and their role in initiating cell adhesion and biofilm formation are of the key importance in understanding the bioremediation process. In fact, the cell-mineral interface reactions not only influence the biodegradation process but many natural phenomena are affected by them.

Understanding role of physicochemical interactions at the bacterial cells and minerals interface in the cell adhesion (as well as biofilm formation, development, and behavior) is essential for planning effective bioremediation techniques. It could potentially help us to predict the contaminants’ fate, and trends of the biodegradation rates in different environments. Consequently, the improved knowledge of the cell-mineral interface enable us to design and apply more sophisticated bioremediation techniques as a viable approach towards tackling the soil and water environmental pollution problems. Figure 1 schematically represents an aquifer and biofilm formation on some of the most abundant minerals in the environment, iron and aluminum oxides. It also indicates some the major effects of cell-mineral interface interactions on different environmental processes (Stumm and Morgan 1996; Zachara and Fredrickson 2004; Cornell and Schwertmann 2003).
Fig. 1

The schematic representation of biofilm formation in aquifers. In the aquatic environments iron and aluminum oxides are of the most common minerals and often precipitate on the surface of other minerals (e.g., quartz). A series of biogeochemical phenomena are influenced by the reaction at cell-mineral interface as seen in this figure

Keywords

Bacterial cell-mineral interface Biofilm Bioremediation Microenvironment Planktonic phase 

References

  1. Al-Abadleh HA, Grassian VH (2003) Oxide surfaces as environmental interfaces. Surf Sci Rep 52:63–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrews JS, Pouran HM, Scholes J, Rolfe SA, Banwart SA (2009) Multi-factorial analysis of surface interactions in single species environmental bacteria and model surfaces. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 73:A44Google Scholar
  3. Andrews JS, Rolfe SA, Huang WE, Scholes JD, Banwart SA (2010) Biofilm formation in environmental bacteria is influenced by different macromolecules depending on genus and species. Environ Microbiol 12:2496–2507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bayoudh S, Othmane A, Bettaieb F, Bakhrouf A, Ben Ouada H, Ponsonnet L, Ouada HB, Ponsonnet L (2006) Quantification of the adhesion free energy between bacteria and hydrophobic and hydrophilic substrata. Mater Sci Eng C-Biomimetic Supramol Syst 26:300–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bergstrom TS, Liu Y, Soto ER, Brown CA, Mcgimpsey WG, Camesano TA, Iv RJE, Bergstrom TS, Liu Y, Soto ER et al (2006) Microscale correlation between surface chemistry, texture, and the adhesive strength of Staphylococcus epidermidis microscale correlation between surface chemistry, texture, and the adhesive strength of Staphylococcus epidermidis. Langmuir 22(26):11311–11321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bos R, van der Mei HC, Busscher HJ (1999) Physico-chemistry of initial microbial adhesive interactions – its mechanisms and methods for study. FEMS Microbiol Rev 23:179–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bourikas K, Kordulis C, Lycourghiotis A (2006) The mechanism of the protonation of metal (hydr)oxides in aqueous solutions studied for various interfacial/surface ionization models and physicochemical parameters: a critical review and a novel approach. Adv Colloid Interf Sci 121:111–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Claessens J, Van Lith Y, Laverman AM, van Lith Y, Laverman AM, Van Cappellen P (2006) Acid-base activity of live bacteria: implications for quantifying cell wall charge. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 70:267–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cornell RM, Schwertmann U (2003) The iron oxides: structure, properties, reactions, occurrences and uses second, completely revised and extended edition. Wiley, WeinheimCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dean JR, Jones MA, Holmes D, Reed R, Weyers J, Jones A (2002) Practical skills in chemistry. Prentice Hall, HarlowGoogle Scholar
  11. Dixon JB, Weed SB (1992) Minerals in soil environment. SSSA Book Ser, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  12. Fedorov MV, Goodman JM, Schumm S (2009) The effect of sodium chloride on poly-L-glutamate conformation. Chem Commun, pp 896–898Google Scholar
  13. Fingerman M, Nagabhushanam R (2016) Bioremediation of aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems, vol 1. CRC PressGoogle Scholar
  14. Gans P, O’Sullivan B (2000) GLEE, a new computer program for glass electrode calibration. Talanta 51:33–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Geoghegan M, Andrews JS, Biggs CA, Eboigbodin KE, Elliott DR, Rolfe S, Scholes J, Ojeda JJ, Romero-Gonzalez ME, Edyvean RGJ et al (2008) The polymer physics and chemistry of microbial cell attachment and adhesion. Faraday Discuss 139:28–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Haws NW, Ball WP, Bouwer EJ (2006) Modeling and interpreting bioavailability of organic contaminant mixtures in subsurface environments. J Contam Hydrol 82:255–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hermansson M (1999) The DLVO theory in microbial adhesion. Coll Surf B Biointerf 14:105–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hong Y, Brown DG (2008) Electrostatic behavior of the charge-regulated bacterial cell surface. Langmuir 24:5003–5009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Huang W, Andrews J, Wang Y, Ultrasonic DNA (2008) Transfer to gram-negative and gram-positive bacteria. Abstr Gen Meet Am Soc Microbiol 108:548Google Scholar
  20. Klabunde KJ (2001) Nanoscale materials in chemistryGoogle Scholar
  21. Law K-Y (2014) Definitions for hydrophilicity, hydrophobicity, and Superhydrophobicity: getting the basics right. J Phys Chem Lett 5(4):686–688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Leone L, Ferri D, Manfredi C, Persson P, Shchukarev A, Sjoberg S, Loring J (2007) Modeling the acid-base properties of bacterial surfaces: a combined spectroscopic and potentiometric study of the gram-positive bacterium Bacillus Subtilis. Env. Sci Technol 41:6465–6471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lindon JC, Tranter GE, Holmes JL (2000) Encyclopedia of spectroscopy and spectrometery, part 1, pp 1–3Google Scholar
  24. Madejova JFTIR (2003) Techniques in clay mineral studies. Vib Spectrosc 31:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Martinez RE, Pokrovsky OS, Schott J, Oelkers EH (2008) Surface charge and zeta-potential of metabolically active and dead cyanobacteria. J Colloid Interface Sci 323:317–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. O’Toole GA, Wong GC (2016) Sensational biofilms: surface sensing in bacteria. Curr Opin Microbiol 30:139–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ojeda JJ, Romero-Gonzalez ME, Pouran HM, Banwart S (2008) In situ monitoring of the biofilm formation of Pseudomonas putida on hematite using flow-cell ATR-FTIR spectroscopy to investigate the formation of inner-sphere bonds between the bacteria and the mineral. Mineral Mag 72(1):101–106Google Scholar
  28. Ojeda JJ, Romero-Gonzalez ME, Bachmann RT, Edyvean RGJ, Banwart SA, Building FM, Uni T, Street M, Sheffield S, Kingdom U (2008b) Characterization of the cell surface and cell wall chemistry of drinking water bacteria by combining XPS, FTIR spectroscopy, modeling, and potentiometric titrations. Langmuir 24(8):4032–4040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pouran HM, Fotovat A, Haghnia G, Halajnia A, Chamsaz, M (2008) A case study: chromium concentration and its species in a calcareous soil affected by leather industries effluents. World Appl Sci J 5(4):484–489Google Scholar
  30. Pouran HM (2009) Studying molecular and nanoscale interactions at metal oxide surfaces and their effects on bacterial adhesionGoogle Scholar
  31. Pouran HM, Andrews JS, Romero-Gonzalez M, Banwart SA (2009) Effects of surface charge and hydrophobicity of synthetic metal oxides on attached growth of environmental bacterial isolates. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 73:A1048–A1048Google Scholar
  32. Pouran HM, Llabjani V, Martin FLFL, Zhang H (2013) Evaluation of ATR-FTIR spectroscopy with multivariate analysis to study the binding mechanisms of ZnO nanoparticles or Zn to Chelex-100 or Metsorb. Env Sci Technol 47(19):11115–11121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pouran HM, Banwart SA, Romero-Gonzales M (2014) Coating a polystyrene well-plate surface with synthetic hematite, goethite and aluminium hydroxide for cell mineral adhesion studies in a controlled environment. Appl Geochem 42(1986):60–68Google Scholar
  34. Pouran HM, Banwart SA, Romero-Gonzalez M (2017) Effects of synthetic iron and aluminium oxide surface charge and hydrophobicity on the formation of bacterial biofilm. Env Sci Proc Imp 19(4):622–634Google Scholar
  35. Redman JA, Walker SL, Elimelech M (2004) Bacterial adhesion and transport in porous media: role of the secondary energy minimum. Env Sci Technol 38:1777–1785CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rosoff M (2002) Nano-surface chemistry. Marcel Dekker Inc, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  37. Schwertmann U, Cornell RM, Wiley InterScience (Online service) (2008) Iron oxides in the laboratory: preparation and characterization. WileyGoogle Scholar
  38. Stumm W, Morgan JJ (1996) Aquatic chemistry, chemical equilibria and rates in natural waters. Wiley, New York, pp 1022Google Scholar
  39. Vadillo-rodri V, Logan BE, Vadillo-Rodriguez V, Logan BE (2006) Localized attraction corrolates with bacterial adhesion to glass and metal oxide substrata. Environ Sci Technol 40(9):2983–2988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Vakarelski IU, Higashitani K (2006) Single-nanoparticle-terminated tips for scanning probe microscopy. Langmuir 22:2931–2934CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wang ZL (2000) Characterization of nanophase materials, pp 432Google Scholar
  42. Watnick P, Kolter R (2000) Biofilm, city of microbes. J Bacteriol 182(10):2675–2679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Young KD (2006) The selective value of bacterial shape. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 70(3):660–703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Zachara J, Fredrickson J (2004) Earth life interaction at the microbe-mineral interface workshop, pp 1–18Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hamid M. Pouran
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Science and Engineering, University of WolverhamptonWolverhamptonUK

Section editors and affiliations

  • Chaudhery Mustansar Hussain
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Chemistry and Environmental SciencesNew Jersey Institute of TechnologyNewarkUSA

Personalised recommendations