Probing Surface Adhesion Forces of <i>Enterococcus </i><i>f</i><i>aecalis</i> to Medical-Grade Polymers Using Atomic Force Microscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to compare the initial adhesion forces of the uropathogen Enterococcus faecalis with the medical-grade polymers polyurethane (PU), polyamide (PA), and poly(tetrafluoroethylene) (PTFE). To quantify the cell-substrate adhesion forces, a method was developed using atomic force microscopy (AFM) in liquid that allows for the detachment of individual live cells from a polymeric surface through the application of increasing force using unmodified cantilever tips. Results show that the lateral force required to detach E. faecalis cells from a substrate differed depending on the nature of the polymeric surface: a force of 19 +/- 4 nN was required to detach cells from PU, 6 +/- 4 nN from PA, and 0.7 +/- 0.3 nN from PTFE. Among the unfluorinated polymers (PU and PA), surface wettability was inversely proportional to the strength of adhesion. AFM images also demonstrated qualitative differences in bacterial adhesion; PU was covered by clusters of cells with few cell singlets present, whereas PA was predominantly covered by individual cells. Moreover, extracellular material could be observed on some clusters of PU-adhered cells as well as in the adjacent region surrounding cells adhered on PA. E. faecalis adhesion to the fluorinated polymer (PTFE) showed different characteristics; only a few individual cells were found, and bacteria were easily damaged, and thus detached, by the tip. This work demonstrates the utility of AFM for measurement of cell-substrate lateral adhesion forces and the contribution these forces make toward understanding the initial stages of bacterial adhesion. Further, it suggests that initial adhesion can be controlled, through appropriate biomaterial design, to prevent subsequent formation of aggregates and biofilms.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".