CELL-SURFACE HYDROPHOBICITY AND ELECTROKINETIC POTENTIAL OF ACTINOBACILLUS-ACTINOMYCETEMCOMITANS AND HAEMOPHILUS-APHROPHILUS

被引:8
作者
HOLM, A [1 ]
KALFAS, S [1 ]
机构
[1] UNIV LUND,SCH DENT,DEPT ORAL MICROBIOL,S-21421 MALMO,SWEDEN
来源
ORAL MICROBIOLOGY AND IMMUNOLOGY | 1991年 / 6卷 / 04期
关键词
ACTINOBACILLUS-ACTINOMYCETEMCOMITANS; HAEMOPHILUS-APHROPHILUS; HYDROPHOBICITY; ELECTROKINETIC POTENTIAL; SALIVA;
D O I
10.1111/j.1399-302X.1991.tb00483.x
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Laboratory strains and fresh isolates of Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans and Haemophilus aphrophilus were examined for cell surface hydrophobicity and for electrokinetic properties under different experimental conditions. Fresh isolates of A. actinomycetemcomitans and H. aphrophilus were hydrophobic. Laboratory strains of A. actinomycetemcomitans were 20-30% less hydrophobic than fresh isolates. No difference was observed between laboratory and fresh isolates of H. aphrophilus. The pH of the suspending buffer, growth phase or incubation atmosphere did not significantly affect the hydrophobicity of the 2 species, whereas agar cultures of H. aphrophilus were less hydrophobic than broth cultures. All A. actinomycetemcomitans strains treated with sterile filtered saliva showed a concentration-dependent decrease in hydrophobicity of at most 30%. H. aphrophilus strains were not affected by the same treatment. Laboratory strains of H. aphrophilus were more negatively charged than A. actinomycetemcomitans, whereas fresh isolates of the 2 species exhibited similar surface charge. In the presence of saliva the mean cell surface charge of laboratory strains decreased by 56% for A. actinomycetemcomitans and by 73% for H. aphrophilus. The results indicate that the 2 species differ in expression of cell structures accounting for hydrophobicity and surface charge and that environmental factors might differently influence the physical properties of the two species analyzed.
引用
收藏
页码:236 / 240
页数:5
相关论文
共 35 条
[1]  
Affias S, West A, Stewart JW, Haldone E, Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans endocarditis, Can Med Assoc J, 118, pp. 1256-1260, (1978)
[2]  
Beighton D, The influence of saliva on the surface hydrophobicity of bacteria isolated from oral sites of macaque monkeys, FEMS Microbiol Lett, 21, pp. 239-241, (1984)
[3]  
Brondz I, Olsen I, Differentiation between Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans and Haemophilus aphrophilus based on carbohydrates in lipopolysaccharide, J Chromatogr, 310, pp. 261-272, (1984)
[4]  
Brondz I, Olsen I, Carbohydrates of whole defatted cells as a basis for differentiation between Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans and Haemophilus aphrophilus, J Chromatogr, 311, pp. 31-81, (1984)
[5]  
de Jong MH, van der Hoeven JS, The growth of oral bacteria in saliva, J Dent Res, 66, pp. 498-505, (1987)
[6]  
Garner JG, Isolation of Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans and Haemophilus aphrophilus at Auckland Hospital, NZ Med J, 89, pp. 384-386, (1979)
[7]  
Gibbons RJ, Etherden I, Comparative hydrophobicities of oral bacteria and their adherence to salivary pellicles, Infect Immun, 41, pp. 1190-1196, (1983)
[8]  
Holm A, Rabe P, Kalfas S, Edwardsson S, Improved selective culture media for Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans and Haemophilus aphrophilus, J Clin Microbiol, 25, pp. 1985-1988, (1987)
[9]  
Kagermeier AS, London J, Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans strains Y4 and N27 adhere to hydroxyapatite by distinctive mechanisms, Infect Immun, 47, pp. 654-658, (1985)
[10]  
Kalfas S, Rundegren J, Biological qualities of saliva sterilized by filtration or ethylene oxide treatment, Oral Microbiol Immunol, 6, pp. 182-186, (1991)