4.6 Article

Atomic Force Microscopy Analysis of the Acinetobacter baumannii Bacteriophage AP22 Lytic Cycle

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 7, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0047348

关键词

-

资金

  1. Moscow State University for young scientists

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Acinetobacter baumannii is known for its ability to develop resistance to the major groups of antibiotics, form biofilms, and survive for long periods in hospital environments. The prevalence of infections caused by multidrug-resistant A. baumannii is a significant problem for the modern health care system, and application of lytic bacteriophages for controlling this pathogen may become a solution. Methodology/Principal Findings: In this study, using atomic force microscopy (AFM) and microbiological assessment we have investigated A. baumannii bacteriophage AP22, which has been recently described. AFM has revealed the morphology of bacteriophage AP22, adsorbed on the surfaces of mica, graphite and host bacterial cells. Besides, morphological changes of bacteriophage AP22-infected A. baumannii cells were characterized at different stages of the lytic cycle, from phage adsorption to the cell lysis. The phage latent period, estimated from AFM was in good agreement with that obtained by microbiological methods (40 min). Bacteriophage AP22, whose head diameter is 62 +/- 1 nm and tail length is 88 +/- 9 nm, was shown to disperse A. baumannii aggregates and adsorb to the bacterial surface right from the first minute of their mutual incubation at 37 degrees C. Conclusions/Significance: High rate of bacteriophage AP22 specific adsorption and its ability to disperse bacterial aggregates make this phage very promising for biomedical antimicrobial applications. Complementing microbiological results with AFM data, we demonstrate an effective approach, which allows not only comparing independently obtained characteristics of the lytic cycle but also visualizing the infection process.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据