2002
DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0447.2002.201224.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Influence of secondary colonizers and human plasma on the adherence of Porphyromonas gingivalis in vitro

Abstract: The influence of secondary colonizers (Fusobacterium nucleatum and Actinomyces naeslundii) and the effect of human plasma on the adherence of Porphyromonas gingivalis were investigated. Hydroxyapatite (HAP) discs coated with Streptococcus sanguis were immersed in a 3H-labeled bacterial cell suspension of F. nucleatum or A. naeslundii and then in a 14C-labeled P. gingivalis cell suspension. Bacterial cells on the discs were pyrolysed to quantify the radioisotopes released. The cell numbers of secondary colonize… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For S. mitis BMS blocking of attachment by biosurfactant production has been reported (29), which might be unique to S. mitis among the current collection of antagonistic strains and could be more effective than the interference mechanisms described hitherto for S. sanguinis , S. crista , and S. salivarius (7, 27, 32). Interestingly, previous reports showed, instead of antagonistic effects, synergistic effects of A. naeslundii on P. gingivalis through co‐aggregation (33) and enhancement of P. gingivalis adhesion (20). However, because it is clinically known that Actinomyces occurs more in healthy pockets than in diseased pockets (12), we believe that the A. naeslundii strain studied here must be considered as an antagonist of P. gingivalis .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…For S. mitis BMS blocking of attachment by biosurfactant production has been reported (29), which might be unique to S. mitis among the current collection of antagonistic strains and could be more effective than the interference mechanisms described hitherto for S. sanguinis , S. crista , and S. salivarius (7, 27, 32). Interestingly, previous reports showed, instead of antagonistic effects, synergistic effects of A. naeslundii on P. gingivalis through co‐aggregation (33) and enhancement of P. gingivalis adhesion (20). However, because it is clinically known that Actinomyces occurs more in healthy pockets than in diseased pockets (12), we believe that the A. naeslundii strain studied here must be considered as an antagonist of P. gingivalis .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…It requires specific pioneer colonizers (e.g., Streptococcus gordonii and Veillonella sp.) or secondary colonizers (e.g., Fusobacterium nucleatum ) to attach to a surface or to grow in a biofilm ( 31 , 33 ). We also grew the P. gingivalis strain ATCC 33277 alone under the same experimental condition (data not shown).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, blocking is determined by repulsive interactions between the adhering antagonist and the periodontopathogen and larger blocking effects may arise, for instance, from biosurfactant production (22). Reports have also shown, instead of antagonistic effects, synergistic effects of A. naeslundii on P. gingivalis through co-aggregation (23) and enhancement of P. gingivalis adhesion (24). However, because it is clinically known that Actinomyces occurs more in healthy pockets than in diseased pockets (25), we believe that the A. naeslundii strain studied here may be considered as an antagonist of P. gingivalis.…”
Section: Prevalence Of Beneficial Bacteria In Aggressive Periodontitismentioning
confidence: 99%