MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386480339 · doi:10.1101/2023.09.05.556382

A genetic screen identifies a role for <i>oprF</i> in <i>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</i> biofilm stimulation by subinhibitory antibiotics

2023· preprint· en· W4386480339 on OpenAlexafffund
Luke N. Yaeger, Michael R. M. Ranieri, Jessica Chee, Sawyer Karabelas-Pittman, Madeleine Rudolph, Alessio M. Giovannoni, Hanjeong Harvey, Lori L. Burrows

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial biofilms and quorum sensing
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Glycomics NetworkNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversities Space Research Association
KeywordsBiofilmMicrobiologyPeriplasmic spacePseudomonas aeruginosaAntibioticsMutantBiologyEscherichia coliCell biologyBiochemistryChemistryBacteriaGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Biofilms are surface-associated communities of bacteria that grow in a self-produced matrix of polysaccharides, proteins, and extracellular DNA (eDNA). Sub-minimal inhibitory concentrations (sub-MIC) of antibiotics induce biofilm formation, indicating a potential defensive response to antibiotic stress. However, the mechanisms behind sub-MIC antibiotic-induced biofilm formation are unclear. We show that treatment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa with multiple classes of sub-MIC antibiotics with distinct targets induces biofilm formation. Further, addition of exogenous eDNA or cell lysate failed to increase biofilm formation to the same extent as antibiotics, suggesting that the release of cellular contents by antibiotic-driven bacteriolysis is insufficient. Using a genetic screen to find stimulation-deficient mutants, we identified the outer membrane porin OprF and the extracytoplasmic function sigma factor SigX as important for the phenotype. Similarly, loss of OmpA – the Escherichia coli OprF homologue – prevented sub-MIC antibiotic stimulation of E. coli biofilms. The C-terminal PG-binding domain of OprF was dispensable for biofilm stimulation. Our screen also identified the periplasmic disulfide bond-forming enzyme DsbA and a predicted cyclic-di-GMP phosphodiesterase encoded by PA2200 as essential for biofilm stimulation. The phosphodiesterase activity of PA2200 is likely controlled by a disulfide bond in its regulatory domain, and folding of OprF is influenced by disulfide bond formation, connecting the mutant phenotypes. Addition of the reducing agent dithiothreitol prevented sub-MIC antibiotic biofilm stimulation. Finally, we show that activation of a c-di-GMP-responsive promoter follows treatment with sub-MIC antibiotics in the wild-type but not an oprF mutant. Together, these results show that antibiotic-induced biofilm formation is likely driven by a signalling pathway that translates changes in periplasmic redox state into elevated biofilm formation through increases in c-di-GMP. Significance Bacterial biofilms cause significant treatment challenges in clinical settings due to their ability to resist antibiotic killing. Paradoxically, sub-inhibitory levels of a number of chemically distinct antibiotics, with different modes of action, can stimulate biofilm formation of multiple bacterial species. In this work we used the biofilm forming opportunistic pathogen Pseudomonas aeruginosa to look for mutants blind to sub-inhibitory antibiotic exposure, failing to demonstrate biofilm stimulation in response to 3 different antibiotics. We identified key players in this response, including the outer membrane porin OprF and the sigma factor SigX. Notably, the hits from our mutant screen connect changes in periplasmic redox state to elevated biofilm formation via c-di-GMP signaling. By understanding these underlying mechanisms, we can better strategize interventions against biofilm-mediated antibiotic resistance in P. aeruginosa and other bacterial species.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicBacterial biofilms and quorum sensing→French-language works237,207→