Renfei Wu, Cong Li, Jiuyi Li, Jelmer Sjollema, Gésinda I. Geertsema-Doornbusch, H. Willy de Haan-Visser, Emma S. C. Dijkstra, Yijin Ren, Zexin Zhang, Jian Liu, Hans C. Flemming, Henk J. Busscher, Henny C. van der Mei
{"title":"细菌杀灭和细菌死亡的范围","authors":"Renfei Wu, Cong Li, Jiuyi Li, Jelmer Sjollema, Gésinda I. Geertsema-Doornbusch, H. Willy de Haan-Visser, Emma S. C. Dijkstra, Yijin Ren, Zexin Zhang, Jian Liu, Hans C. Flemming, Henk J. Busscher, Henny C. van der Mei","doi":"10.1038/s41522-024-00559-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Bacteria can be dead, alive, or exhibit slowed or suspended life forms, making bacterial death difficult to establish. Here, agar-plating, microscopic-counting, SYTO9/propidium-iodide staining, MTT-conversion, and bioluminescence-imaging were used to determine bacterial death upon exposure to different conditions. Rank correlations between pairs of assay outcomes were low, indicating different assays measure different aspects of bacterial death. Principal-component analysis yielded two principal components, named “reproductive-ability” (PC1) and “metabolic-activity” (PC2). Plotting of these principal components in two-dimensional space revealed a dead region, with borders defined by the PC1 and PC2 values. <i>Sensu stricto</i> implies an unpractical reality that all assays determining PC1 and PC2 must be carried out in order to establish bacterial death. Considering this unpracticality, it is suggested that at least one assay determining reproductive activity (PC1) and one assay determining metabolic activity (PC2) should be used to establish bacterial death. Minimally, researchers should specifically describe which dimension of bacterial death is assessed, when addressing bacterial death.</p>","PeriodicalId":19370,"journal":{"name":"npj Biofilms and Microbiomes","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bacterial killing and the dimensions of bacterial death\",\"authors\":\"Renfei Wu, Cong Li, Jiuyi Li, Jelmer Sjollema, Gésinda I. Geertsema-Doornbusch, H. Willy de Haan-Visser, Emma S. C. Dijkstra, Yijin Ren, Zexin Zhang, Jian Liu, Hans C. Flemming, Henk J. Busscher, Henny C. van der Mei\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41522-024-00559-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Bacteria can be dead, alive, or exhibit slowed or suspended life forms, making bacterial death difficult to establish. Here, agar-plating, microscopic-counting, SYTO9/propidium-iodide staining, MTT-conversion, and bioluminescence-imaging were used to determine bacterial death upon exposure to different conditions. Rank correlations between pairs of assay outcomes were low, indicating different assays measure different aspects of bacterial death. Principal-component analysis yielded two principal components, named “reproductive-ability” (PC1) and “metabolic-activity” (PC2). Plotting of these principal components in two-dimensional space revealed a dead region, with borders defined by the PC1 and PC2 values. <i>Sensu stricto</i> implies an unpractical reality that all assays determining PC1 and PC2 must be carried out in order to establish bacterial death. Considering this unpracticality, it is suggested that at least one assay determining reproductive activity (PC1) and one assay determining metabolic activity (PC2) should be used to establish bacterial death. Minimally, researchers should specifically describe which dimension of bacterial death is assessed, when addressing bacterial death.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19370,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"npj Biofilms and Microbiomes\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"npj Biofilms and Microbiomes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41522-024-00559-9\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"npj Biofilms and Microbiomes","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41522-024-00559-9","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Bacterial killing and the dimensions of bacterial death
Bacteria can be dead, alive, or exhibit slowed or suspended life forms, making bacterial death difficult to establish. Here, agar-plating, microscopic-counting, SYTO9/propidium-iodide staining, MTT-conversion, and bioluminescence-imaging were used to determine bacterial death upon exposure to different conditions. Rank correlations between pairs of assay outcomes were low, indicating different assays measure different aspects of bacterial death. Principal-component analysis yielded two principal components, named “reproductive-ability” (PC1) and “metabolic-activity” (PC2). Plotting of these principal components in two-dimensional space revealed a dead region, with borders defined by the PC1 and PC2 values. Sensu stricto implies an unpractical reality that all assays determining PC1 and PC2 must be carried out in order to establish bacterial death. Considering this unpracticality, it is suggested that at least one assay determining reproductive activity (PC1) and one assay determining metabolic activity (PC2) should be used to establish bacterial death. Minimally, researchers should specifically describe which dimension of bacterial death is assessed, when addressing bacterial death.
期刊介绍:
npj Biofilms and Microbiomes is a comprehensive platform that promotes research on biofilms and microbiomes across various scientific disciplines. The journal facilitates cross-disciplinary discussions to enhance our understanding of the biology, ecology, and communal functions of biofilms, populations, and communities. It also focuses on applications in the medical, environmental, and engineering domains. The scope of the journal encompasses all aspects of the field, ranging from cell-cell communication and single cell interactions to the microbiomes of humans, animals, plants, and natural and built environments. The journal also welcomes research on the virome, phageome, mycome, and fungome. It publishes both applied science and theoretical work. As an open access and interdisciplinary journal, its primary goal is to publish significant scientific advancements in microbial biofilms and microbiomes. The journal enables discussions that span multiple disciplines and contributes to our understanding of the social behavior of microbial biofilm populations and communities, and their impact on life, human health, and the environment.