Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Phenotypic Diversification and Adaptation of Serratia marcescens MG1 Biofilm-Derived Morphotypes

Phenotypic Diversification and Adaptation of Serratia marcescens MG1 Biofilm-Derived Morphotypes Phenotypic Diversification and Adaptation of Serratia marcescens MG1 Biofilm-Derived Morphotypes ▿ Kai Shyang Koh 1 , 2 , Kin Wai Lam 1 , 2 , Morten Alhede 3 , Shu Yeong Queck 1 , 2 , † , Maurizio Labbate 1 , 2 , ‡ , Staffan Kjelleberg 1 , 2 , * , and Scott A. Rice 1 , 2 1 The Centre for Marine Biofouling and Bio-Innovation, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia 2 The School of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia 3 Center for Biomedical Microbiology, BioCentrum-DTU, Technical University of Denmark, DK-2800 Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark ABSTRACT We report here the characterization of dispersal variants from microcolony-type biofilms of Serratia marcescens MG1. Biofilm formation proceeds through a reproducible process of attachment, aggregation, microcolony development, hollow colony formation, and dispersal. From the time when hollow colonies were observed in flow cell biofilms after 3 to 4 days, at least six different morphological colony variants were consistently isolated from the biofilm effluent. The timing and pattern of variant formation were found to follow a predictable sequence, where some variants, such as a smooth variant with a sticky colony texture (SSV), could be consistently isolated at the time when mature hollow colonies were observed, whereas a variant that produced copious amounts of capsular polysaccharide (SUMV) was always isolated at late stages of biofilm development and coincided with cell death and biofilm dispersal or sloughing. The morphological variants differed extensively from the wild type in attachment, biofilm formation, and cell ultrastructure properties. For example, SSV formed two- to threefold more biofilm biomass than the wild type in batch biofilm assays, despite having a similar growth rate and attachment capacity. Interestingly, the SUMV, and no other variants, was readily isolated from an established SSV biofilm, indicating that the SUMV is a second-generation genetic variant derived from SSV. Planktonic cultures showed significantly lower frequencies of variant formation than the biofilms (5.05 × 10 −8 versus 4.83 × 10 −6 , respectively), suggesting that there is strong, diversifying selection occurring within biofilms and that biofilm dispersal involves phenotypic radiation with divergent phenotypes. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Bacteriology American Society For Microbiology

Phenotypic Diversification and Adaptation of Serratia marcescens MG1 Biofilm-Derived Morphotypes

Phenotypic Diversification and Adaptation of Serratia marcescens MG1 Biofilm-Derived Morphotypes

Journal of Bacteriology , Volume 189 (1): 119 – Jan 1, 2007

Abstract

Phenotypic Diversification and Adaptation of Serratia marcescens MG1 Biofilm-Derived Morphotypes ▿ Kai Shyang Koh 1 , 2 , Kin Wai Lam 1 , 2 , Morten Alhede 3 , Shu Yeong Queck 1 , 2 , † , Maurizio Labbate 1 , 2 , ‡ , Staffan Kjelleberg 1 , 2 , * , and Scott A. Rice 1 , 2 1 The Centre for Marine Biofouling and Bio-Innovation, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia 2 The School of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia 3 Center for Biomedical Microbiology, BioCentrum-DTU, Technical University of Denmark, DK-2800 Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark ABSTRACT We report here the characterization of dispersal variants from microcolony-type biofilms of Serratia marcescens MG1. Biofilm formation proceeds through a reproducible process of attachment, aggregation, microcolony development, hollow colony formation, and dispersal. From the time when hollow colonies were observed in flow cell biofilms after 3 to 4 days, at least six different morphological colony variants were consistently isolated from the biofilm effluent. The timing and pattern of variant formation were found to follow a predictable sequence, where some variants, such as a smooth variant with a sticky colony texture (SSV), could be consistently isolated at the time when mature hollow colonies were observed, whereas a variant that produced copious amounts of capsular polysaccharide (SUMV) was always isolated at late stages of biofilm development and coincided with cell death and biofilm dispersal or sloughing. The morphological variants differed extensively from the wild type in attachment, biofilm formation, and cell ultrastructure properties. For example, SSV formed two- to threefold more biofilm biomass than the wild type in batch biofilm assays, despite having a similar growth rate and attachment capacity. Interestingly, the SUMV, and no other variants, was readily isolated from an established SSV biofilm, indicating that the SUMV is a second-generation genetic variant derived from SSV. Planktonic cultures showed significantly lower frequencies of variant formation than the biofilms (5.05 × 10 −8 versus 4.83 × 10 −6 , respectively), suggesting that there is strong, diversifying selection occurring within biofilms and that biofilm dispersal involves phenotypic radiation with divergent phenotypes.

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-society-for-microbiology/phenotypic-diversification-and-adaptation-of-serratia-marcescens-mg1-gNoB8cVOiR

References (59)

Publisher
American Society For Microbiology
Copyright
Copyright © 2007 by the American society for Microbiology.
ISSN
0021-9193
eISSN
1098-5530
DOI
10.1128/JB.00930-06
pmid
17071749
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Phenotypic Diversification and Adaptation of Serratia marcescens MG1 Biofilm-Derived Morphotypes ▿ Kai Shyang Koh 1 , 2 , Kin Wai Lam 1 , 2 , Morten Alhede 3 , Shu Yeong Queck 1 , 2 , † , Maurizio Labbate 1 , 2 , ‡ , Staffan Kjelleberg 1 , 2 , * , and Scott A. Rice 1 , 2 1 The Centre for Marine Biofouling and Bio-Innovation, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia 2 The School of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia 3 Center for Biomedical Microbiology, BioCentrum-DTU, Technical University of Denmark, DK-2800 Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark ABSTRACT We report here the characterization of dispersal variants from microcolony-type biofilms of Serratia marcescens MG1. Biofilm formation proceeds through a reproducible process of attachment, aggregation, microcolony development, hollow colony formation, and dispersal. From the time when hollow colonies were observed in flow cell biofilms after 3 to 4 days, at least six different morphological colony variants were consistently isolated from the biofilm effluent. The timing and pattern of variant formation were found to follow a predictable sequence, where some variants, such as a smooth variant with a sticky colony texture (SSV), could be consistently isolated at the time when mature hollow colonies were observed, whereas a variant that produced copious amounts of capsular polysaccharide (SUMV) was always isolated at late stages of biofilm development and coincided with cell death and biofilm dispersal or sloughing. The morphological variants differed extensively from the wild type in attachment, biofilm formation, and cell ultrastructure properties. For example, SSV formed two- to threefold more biofilm biomass than the wild type in batch biofilm assays, despite having a similar growth rate and attachment capacity. Interestingly, the SUMV, and no other variants, was readily isolated from an established SSV biofilm, indicating that the SUMV is a second-generation genetic variant derived from SSV. Planktonic cultures showed significantly lower frequencies of variant formation than the biofilms (5.05 × 10 −8 versus 4.83 × 10 −6 , respectively), suggesting that there is strong, diversifying selection occurring within biofilms and that biofilm dispersal involves phenotypic radiation with divergent phenotypes.

Journal

Journal of BacteriologyAmerican Society For Microbiology

Published: Jan 1, 2007

There are no references for this article.