» Articles » PMID: 30131867

Towards Standardized Mechanical Characterization of Microbial Biofilms: Analysis and Critical Review

Overview
Date 2018 Aug 23
PMID 30131867
Citations 52
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Developing reliable anti-biofilm strategies or efficient biofilm-based bioprocesses strongly depends on having a clear understanding of the mechanisms underlying biofilm development, and knowledge of the relevant mechanical parameters describing microbial biofilm behavior. Many varied mechanical testing methods are available to assess these parameters. The mechanical properties thus identified can then be used to compare protocols such as antibiotic screening. However, the lack of standardization in both mechanical testing and the associated identification methods for a given microbiological goal remains a blind spot in the biofilm community. The pursuit of standardization is problematic, as biofilms are living structures, i.e., both complex and dynamic. Here, we review the main available methods for characterizing the mechanical properties of biofilms through the lens of the relationship linking experimental testing to the identification of mechanical parameters. We propose guidelines for characterizing biofilms according to microbiological objectives that will help the reader choose an appropriate test and a relevant identification method for measuring any given mechanical parameter. The use of a common methodology for the mechanical characterization of biofilms will enable reliable analysis and comparison of microbiological protocols needed for improvement of engineering process and screening.

Citing Articles

Liquid-bodied antibiofilm robot with switchable viscoelastic response for biofilm eradication on complex surface topographies.

Sun B, Guo J, Hao B, Cao Y, Chan T, Sun M Sci Adv. 2025; 11(11):eadt8213.

PMID: 40073138 PMC: 11900878. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.adt8213.


Rapid Stiffness Mapping in Soft Biologic Tissues With Micrometer Resolution Using Optical Multifrequency Time-Harmonic Elastography.

Jordan J, Jaitner N, Meyer T, Brame L, Ghrayeb M, Koppke J Adv Sci (Weinh). 2024; 12(8):e2410473.

PMID: 39686564 PMC: 11848577. DOI: 10.1002/advs.202410473.


Nonlinear viscoelasticity of filamentous fungal biofilms of .

Aiswarya N, Tabraiz S, Taneja H, Ahmed A, Aravinda Narayanan R Biofilm. 2024; 8:100227.

PMID: 39430296 PMC: 11490880. DOI: 10.1016/j.bioflm.2024.100227.


Effect of a Depolymerase Encoded by Phage168 on a Carbapenem-Resistant and Its Biofilm.

Sun X, Pu B, Qin J, Xiang J Pathogens. 2023; 12(12).

PMID: 38133282 PMC: 10745733. DOI: 10.3390/pathogens12121396.


Dental unit waterline testing practices: an 11-Year retrospective study.

Buitrago J, Kolbe R, Siqueira M BMC Oral Health. 2023; 23(1):867.

PMID: 37968643 PMC: 10652605. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-023-03590-y.


References
1.
Abe Y, Skali-Lami S, Block J, Francius G . Cohesiveness and hydrodynamic properties of young drinking water biofilms. Water Res. 2012; 46(4):1155-66. DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2011.12.013. View

2.
Rogers S, van der Walle C, Waigh T . Microrheology of bacterial biofilms in vitro: Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Langmuir. 2008; 24(23):13549-55. DOI: 10.1021/la802442d. View

3.
Alfa M, Howie R . Modeling microbial survival in buildup biofilm for complex medical devices. BMC Infect Dis. 2009; 9:56. PMC: 2689233. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2334-9-56. View

4.
Zegans M, Shanks R, OToole G . Bacterial biofilms and ocular infections. Ocul Surf. 2006; 3(2):73-80. DOI: 10.1016/s1542-0124(12)70155-6. View

5.
Mohle R, Langemann T, Haesner M, Augustin W, Scholl S, Neu T . Structure and shear strength of microbial biofilms as determined with confocal laser scanning microscopy and fluid dynamic gauging using a novel rotating disc biofilm reactor. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2007; 98(4):747-55. DOI: 10.1002/bit.21448. View