Specific and non-specific interactions in bacterial adhesion to solid substrata

Abstract

Based on a literature review, a hypothesis is forwarded on the mechanism of initial bacterial adhesion to solid substrata, which accounts both for the role of specific microscopic surface components as well as for the role of non‐specific macroscopic surface properties (surface free energy, zeta potential or hydrophobicity). Three distinct regions in the adhesion process are suggested in which at large and intermediate separation distances adhesion is mediated by the macroscopic surface properties as surface free energy and surface charge, respectively. At small separation distances specific short‐range interactions can occur, leading to a strong and irreversible bonding, provided the water film present in between the interaction surfaces can be removed. A major role of hydrophobic groups, supposed to be associated with bacterial surface appendages is suggested to be its dehydrating capacity, enabling the removal of the vicinal water film yielding small areas of direct contact between protruberant parts of the cell surface and the substratum.

Physicochemical analysis of initial adhesion and biofilm formation of Methanosarcina barkeri on polymer support material

“…This phenotypic cell change has been reported to occur earlier on hydrophobic and low surface free energy materials than on hydrophilic high surface free energy materials, and is a role of hydrophobicity [33]. This finding could explain the observed polymeric material on the surfaces of PVC and PTFE in the SEM images (Fig.3).…”

“…This highlights the important role that hydrogen bonding of the water molecules surrounding the interacting substrata has on the process of microbial adhesion to hydrophobic and low surface free energy materials [32]. Such surfaces are reported to have a better propensity in removing water from the area between two contacting substrata, therefore leading to a stronger level of microbial adhesion [33].…”

Inhibition of adhesion of yeasts and bacteria by poly(ethylene oxide)-brushes on glass in a parallel plate flow chamber

“…Hamaker constants for micro-organisms interacting with glass surfaces are not well known and values ranging from 0?56610 221 to 6?9610 221 J have been reported (Busscher & Weerkamp, 1987;Rijnaarts et al, 1995;Mafu et al, 1991). Using these values, a range of possible Lifshitz-Van der Waals interaction energies can be calculated.…”

“…Biofilm formation on biomaterial implant surfaces and subsequent infectious complications are a frequent reason for failure of many biomedical devices, such as total hip arthroplasties, in-dwelling voice prostheses and vascular and urinary catheters (Gristina, 1987). While the mechanism of bacterial adhesion to the biomaterial surface has not been fully elucidated, interactions between biomaterial surfaces and bacteria have been reported to include non-specific and specific interactions, such as electrostatic and Lifshitz-Van der Waals forces, hydrophobic interactions and a variety of specific receptor-adhesin interactions (Hermansson, 1999;Busscher & Weerkamp, 1987).…”

Biofilm and Urogenital Infections

“…The creation of a conditioning film alters the surface characteristics of implants. The role of the conditioning film is vital as many pathogens do not have mechanisms allowing them to adhere directly or strongly onto bare implant surfaces [8]. The next step in the development of a biofilm is the approach and attachment of microorganisms.…”