A Distinguishable Role of eDNA in the Viscoelastic Relaxation of Biofilms

ABSTRACT Bacteria in the biofilm mode of growth are protected against chemical and mechanical stresses. Biofilms are composed, for the most part, of extracellular polymeric substances (EPSs). The extracellular matrix is composed of different chemical constituents, such as proteins, polysaccharides, and extracellular DNA (eDNA). Here we aimed to identify the roles of different matrix constituents in the viscoelastic response of biofilms. Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Streptococcus mutans, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms were grown under different conditions yielding distinct matrix chemistries. Next, biofilms were subjected to mechanical deformation and stress relaxation was monitored over time. A Maxwell model possessing an average of four elements for an individual biofilm was used to fit the data. Maxwell elements were defined by a relaxation time constant and their relative importance. Relaxation time constants varied widely over the 104 biofilms included and were divided into seven ranges (<1, 1 to 5, 5 to 10, 10 to 50, 50 to 100, 100 to 500, and >500 s). Principal-component analysis was carried out to eliminate related time constant ranges, yielding three principal components that could be related to the known matrix chemistries. The fastest relaxation component (<3 s) was due to the presence of water and soluble polysaccharides, combined with the absence of bacteria, i.e., the heaviest masses in a biofilm. An intermediate component (3 to 70 s) was related to other EPSs, while a distinguishable role was assigned to intact eDNA, which possesses a unique principal component with a time constant range (10 to 25 s) between those of EPS constituents. This implies that eDNA modulates its interaction with other matrix constituents to control its contribution to viscoelastic relaxation under mechanical stress. IMPORTANCE The protection offered by biofilms to organisms that inhabit it against chemical and mechanical stresses is due in part to its matrix of extracellular polymeric substances (EPSs) in which biofilm organisms embed themselves. Mechanical stresses lead to deformation and possible detachment of biofilm organisms, and hence, rearrangement processes occur in a biofilm to relieve it from these stresses. Maxwell analysis of stress relaxation allows the determination of characteristic relaxation time constants, but the biofilm components and matrix constituents associated with different stress relaxation processes have never been identified. Here we grew biofilms with different matrix constituents and used principal-component analysis to reveal that the presence of water and soluble polysaccharides, together with the absence of bacteria, is associated with the fastest relaxation, while other EPSs control a second, slower relaxation. Extracellular DNA, as a matrix constituent, had a distinguishable role with its own unique principal component in stress relaxation with a time constant range between those of other EPSs. The protection offered by biofilms to organisms that inhabit it against chemical and mechanical stresses is due in part to its matrix of extracellular polymeric substances (EPSs) in which biofilm organisms embed themselves. Mechanical stresses lead to deformation and possible detachment of biofilm organisms, and hence, rearrangement processes occur in a biofilm to relieve it from these stresses. Maxwell analysis of stress relaxation allows the determination of characteristic relaxation time constants, but the biofilm components and matrix constituents associated with different stress relaxation processes have never been identified. Here we grew biofilms with different matrix constituents and used principal-component analysis to reveal that the presence of water and soluble polysaccharides, together with the absence of bacteria, is associated with the fastest relaxation, while other EPSs control a second, slower relaxation. Extracellular DNA, as a matrix constituent, had a distinguishable role with its own unique principal component in stress relaxation with a time constant range between those of other EPSs.

[1]  Jost Wingender,et al.  Influence of extracellular polymeric substances on deposition and redeposition of Pseudomonas aeruginosa to surfaces. , 2002, Microbiology.

[2]  A. Caputo,et al.  Distribution of stress patterns in the human zygomatic arch and bone. , 1981, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[3]  P. Chomczyński,et al.  Single-step method of RNA isolation by acid guanidinium thiocyanate-phenol-chloroform extraction. , 1987, Analytical biochemistry.

[4]  J. Costerton,et al.  Bacterial biofilms: a common cause of persistent infections. , 1999, Science.

[5]  I. R. Hamilton,et al.  Survival of oral bacteria. , 1998, Critical reviews in oral biology and medicine : an official publication of the American Association of Oral Biologists.

[6]  F. Smith,et al.  COLORIMETRIC METHOD FOR DETER-MINATION OF SUGAR AND RELATED SUBSTANCE , 1956 .

[7]  P Stoodley,et al.  Survival strategies of infectious biofilms. , 2005, Trends in microbiology.

[8]  V. Körstgens,et al.  Uniaxial compression measurement device for investigation of the mechanical stability of biofilms. , 2001, Journal of microbiological methods.

[9]  Cory J. Rupp,et al.  Biofilm material properties as related to shear-induced deformation and detachment phenomena , 2002, Journal of Industrial Microbiology and Biotechnology.

[10]  R. Gaynes,et al.  Hospital-acquired infections in the United States. The importance of interhospital comparisons. , 1997, Infectious disease clinics of North America.

[11]  R. Losick,et al.  A major protein component of the Bacillus subtilis biofilm matrix , 2006, Molecular microbiology.

[12]  Henny C van der Mei,et al.  Role of eDNA on the adhesion forces between Streptococcus mutans and substratum surfaces: influence of ionic strength and substratum hydrophobicity. , 2011, Langmuir : the ACS journal of surfaces and colloids.

[13]  W. Bowen,et al.  Influences of starch and sucrose on Streptococcus mutans biofilms. , 2008, Oral microbiology and immunology.

[14]  Cory J. Rupp,et al.  Commonality of elastic relaxation times in biofilms. , 2004, Physical review letters.

[15]  H. C. van der Mei,et al.  Generalized Relationship between Numbers of Bacteria and Their Viability in Biofilms , 2011, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[16]  J. Helbert,et al.  Color Reaction of Hexuronic Acids with Anthrone , 1956 .

[17]  Daniele Daffonchio,et al.  Release and persistence of extracellular DNA in the environment. , 2007, Environmental biosafety research.

[18]  H. C. van der Mei,et al.  Adhesion of coagulase-negative staphylococci grouped according to physico-chemical surface properties. , 1997, Microbiology.

[19]  G. Dunny,et al.  Enterococcus faecalis Produces Abundant Extracellular Structures Containing DNA in the Absence of Cell Lysis during Early Biofilm Formation , 2012, mBio.

[20]  A. Filloux,et al.  Chemical Analysis of Cellular and Extracellular Carbohydrates of a Biofilm-Forming Strain Pseudomonas aeruginosa PA14 , 2010, PloS one.

[21]  G. O’Toole,et al.  Mechanisms of biofilm resistance to antimicrobial agents. , 2001, Trends in microbiology.

[22]  H. C. van der Mei,et al.  Energy transfer, volumetric expansion, and removal of oral biofilms by non-contact brushing. , 2010, European journal of oral sciences.

[23]  A. Holck,et al.  Biofilm Formation and the Presence of the Intercellular Adhesion Locus ica among Staphylococci from Food and Food Processing Environments , 2003, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[24]  L. Hancock,et al.  Regulation of Autolysis-Dependent Extracellular DNA Release by Enterococcus faecalis Extracellular Proteases Influences Biofilm Development , 2008, Journal of bacteriology.

[25]  B. Hamaker,et al.  Dynamics of Streptococcus mutans Transcriptome in Response to Starch and Sucrose during Biofilm Development , 2010, PloS one.

[26]  J. V. van Horn,et al.  Concepts for increasing gentamicin release from handmade bone cement beads , 2009, Acta orthopaedica.

[27]  D J Nicholls,et al.  Malate dehydrogenase: A model for structure, evolution, and catalysis , 1994, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[28]  M. Herzberg,et al.  The role of alginate in Pseudomonas aeruginosa EPS adherence, viscoelastic properties and cell attachment , 2011, Biofouling.

[29]  E. Sackmann,et al.  Measurement of local viscoelasticity and forces in living cells by magnetic tweezers. , 1999, Biophysical journal.

[30]  Henk J. Busscher,et al.  Role of Extracellular DNA in Initial Bacterial Adhesion and Surface Aggregation , 2010, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[31]  F P T Baaijens,et al.  Mechanical properties and failure of Streptococcus mutans biofilms, studied using a microindentation device. , 2006, Journal of microbiological methods.

[32]  P. Nilsson,et al.  Invasive Staphylococcus aureus strains are highly variable in PFGE patterns, agr group and exoprotein production , 2009, Scandinavian journal of infectious diseases.

[33]  A. Redaelli,et al.  Viscoelastic properties of model segments of collagen molecules. , 2012, Matrix biology : journal of the International Society for Matrix Biology.

[34]  J. Gimzewski,et al.  DNA Builds and Strengthens the Extracellular Matrix in Myxococcus xanthus Biofilms by Interacting with Exopolysaccharides , 2012, PloS one.

[35]  A. Danchin,et al.  Genome‐based analysis of virulence genes in a non‐biofilm‐forming Staphylococcus epidermidis strain (ATCC 12228) , 2003, Molecular microbiology.

[36]  D. Allison,et al.  The Biofilm Matrix , 2003, Biofouling.

[37]  A. Schito,et al.  Effect of fosfomycin alone and in combination with N-acetylcysteine on E. coli biofilms. , 2003, International journal of antimicrobial agents.

[38]  Jeffrey B. Kaplan,et al.  Differential Roles of Poly-N-Acetylglucosamine Surface Polysaccharide and Extracellular DNA in Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis Biofilms , 2007, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[39]  H. C. van der Mei,et al.  Environmental and centrifugal factors influencing the visco-elastic properties of oral biofilms in vitro , 2012, Biofouling.

[40]  P. Stewart,et al.  Adaptive responses to antimicrobial agents in biofilms. , 2005, Environmental microbiology.

[41]  G. Peters,et al.  A 140-kilodalton extracellular protein is essential for the accumulation of Staphylococcus epidermidis strains on surfaces , 1997, Infection and immunity.

[42]  S. Kjelleberg,et al.  A characterization of DNA release in Pseudomonas aeruginosa cultures and biofilms , 2006, Molecular microbiology.

[43]  J. Merritt,et al.  Role of sucrose in the fitness of Streptococcus mutans. , 2008, Oral microbiology and immunology.

[44]  P. Stewart,et al.  Mechanisms of antibiotic resistance in bacterial biofilms. , 2002, International journal of medical microbiology : IJMM.

[45]  R. Zenobi,et al.  Towards chemical analysis of nanostructures in biofilms I: imaging of biological nanostructures , 2008, Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry.