CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 101Bacteriophages and microbial interactionsBacterial biofilms and quorum sensingEvolution and Genetic Dynamics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Targeting Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilm with an evolutionary trained bacteriophage cocktail exploiting phage resistance trade-offs

Open access
Kunisch, Fabian, Campobasso, Claudia, Wagemans, Jeroen, Yildirim, Selma, Chan, Benjamin K., Schaudinn, Christoph, Lavigne, Rob, Turner, Paul E., Raschke, Michael J., Trampuz, Andrej, Gonzalez Moreno, Mercedes·2024·Nature Communications
DOI 10.1038/s41467-024-52595-wPMC PMC11450229

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Spread of multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains threatens to render currently available antibiotics obsolete, with limited prospects for the development of new antibiotics. Lytic bacteriophages, the viruses of bacteria, represent a path to combat this threat. In vitro-directed evolution is traditionally applied to expand the bacteriophage host range or increase bacterial suppression in planktonic cultures. However, while up to 80% of human microbial infections are biofilm-associated, research towards targeted improvement of bacteriophages’ ability to combat biofilms remains scarce. This study aims at an in vitro biofilm evolution assay to improve multiple bacteriophage parameters in parallel and the optimisation of bacteriophage cocktail design by exploiting a bacterial bacteriophage resistance trade-off. The evolved bacteriophages show an expanded host spectrum, improved antimicrobial efficacy and enhanced antibiofilm performance, as assessed by isothermal microcalorimetry and quantitative polymerase chain reaction, respectively. Our two-phage cocktail reveals further improved antimicrobial efficacy without incurring dual-bacteriophage-resistance in treated bacteria. We anticipate this assay will allow a better understanding of phenotypic-genomic relationships in bacteriophages and enable the training of bacteriophages against other desired pathogens. This, in turn, will strengthen bacteriophage therapy as a treatment adjunct to improve clinical outcomes of multidrug-resistant bacterial infections.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41467-024-52595-w

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 Experimental design of the antibiofilm evolution assay. Experimental setup of the evolution assay to extend the host range and improve the antimicrobial and antibiofilm activity of bacteriophages (phages). a Biofilm formation on porous glass beads by incubation with P. aeruginosa in tryptic soy broth (TSB) under agitation and 37 °C. Dip-washing of beads with 24 h pre-established biofilm in sterile phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) before transferal into the calorimetric ampules. b Representation of one calorimetric ampule containing a 24 h pre-stablished biofilm bead of one P. aeruginosa strain in TSB and the phage mixture at round 0 (R0) containing the four ancestral phages. A total of 43 ampules (one growth control and four phage mixture dilutions per strain and three sterility controls) were used during each round of evolution. c Heat production (J) was recorded for each individual ampule by isothermal calorimetry during 24 h. d At the end of each round, the percentage heat reduction of phage-containing ampules relative to growth control ampules was determined at a 24 h (rounds 1–15) or 8 h (rounds 16–30) time point. Samples showing a heat reduction equal or above 75% (referred to as active samples) were selected and pooled together with the undiluted phage samples (always included) into the new phage mixture. e Across all eight bacterial strains, the undiluted and the active samples after each round were pooled together, creating the phage mixture that served as starting point for the next round, and hence was added to pre-stablished biofilm beads anew. In total, 30 rounds of evolution were performed. Figure 1 was created with BioRender.com and released under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International license (https://creativecommons.org/licences/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.en).
Fig. 1 Experimental design of the antibiofilm evolution assay. Experimental setup of the evolution assay to extend the host range and improve the antimicrobial and antibiofilm activity of bacteriophages (phages). a Biofilm formation on porous glass beads by incubation with P. aeruginosa in tryptic soy broth (TSB) under agitation and 37 °C. Dip-washing of beads with 24 h pre-established biofilm in sterile phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) before transferal into the calorimetric ampules. b Representation of one calorimetric ampule containing a 24 h pre-stablished biofilm bead of one P. aeruginosa strain in TSB and the phage mixture at round 0 (R0) containing the four ancestral phages. A total of 43 ampules (one growth control and four phage mixture dilutions per strain and three sterility controls) were used during each round of evolution. c Heat production (J) was recorded for each individual ampule by isothermal calorimetry during 24 h. d At the end of each round, the percentage heat reduction of phage-containing ampules relative to growth control ampules was determined at a 24 h (rounds 1–15) or 8 h (rounds 16–30) time point. Samples showing a heat reduction equal or above 75% (referred to as active samples) were selected and pooled together with the undiluted phage samples (always included) into the new phage mixture. e Across all eight bacterial strains, the undiluted and the active samples after each round were pooled together, creating the phage mixture that served as starting point for the next round, and hence was added to pre-stablished biofilm beads anew. In total, 30 rounds of evolution were performed. Figure 1 was created with BioRender.com and released under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International license (https://creativecommons.org/licences/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.en).CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 2 Host range analysis of unevolved and evolved phages. a Phylogenetic tree based on the core genes (3,667 of 19,556 genes) of the P. aeruginosa strain collection (80 strains) encompassing four genomic clusters (Cluster 1, black branch, 71.3%; Cluster 2, blue branch, 25.0%; Cluster 3, violet branch, 1.3%; Cluster 4, green branch, 2.5%). Classification of each strain according to its resistance profile (4MRGN, red lettering; 3MRGN, blue lettering; MRGN, multi-resistance Gram-negative). Strains marked with an asterisk were included in the experimental evolution. Activity determination of the unevolved (dark grey) and evolved (R15, blue; R30, green) phages against the bacterial collection by spot assay overlay (heat map). b Percentual (white lettering) and absolute (black lettering) infectivity of each phage among the bacterial collection. Vertical dotted line represents the percentage of bacterial strains susceptible to at least one phage (62.5%). 37.5% (30 strains) of bacterial strains were not susceptible to any phage (CRS, completely resistant strains). c Representation of the infectivity gains and losses of the evolved phages. An infectivity gain (yellow bar) is defined as the capability of an evolved phage to infect a bacterial strain that was initially not susceptible to the phage’s genomically closest unevolved progenitor phage. A loss of infectivity (red bar) occurred when a bacterial strain is susceptible to the unevolved ancestral phage but resistant to the corresponding evolved phage. d Representation of the cumulated infectivity gains of the evolved phages among the evolution strains (ES) or all strains (AS, excluding the ES and CRS). Among the ES (n = 8), three strains (stacked blue boxes, numbers at the side of the boxes indicate the infectivity gains on the according strain) resulted in 14 infectivity gains (Paer85, 8 gains; PAO1, 4 gains; Paer09, 2 gains). The 53 infectivity gains among AS (n = 42) correspond to gains on 22 strains (stacked grey boxes, numbers at the side of the boxes indicate the infectivity gains on the according strain). For direct comparability of the two strain populations (ES and AS), the cumulated values were divided by the number of strains in each group, resulting in averaged gains per strain (yellow circles).
Fig. 2 Host range analysis of unevolved and evolved phages. a Phylogenetic tree based on the core genes (3,667 of 19,556 genes) of the P. aeruginosa strain collection (80 strains) encompassing four genomic clusters (Cluster 1, black branch, 71.3%; Cluster 2, blue branch, 25.0%; Cluster 3, violet branch, 1.3%; Cluster 4, green branch, 2.5%). Classification of each strain according to its resistance profile (4MRGN, red lettering; 3MRGN, blue lettering; MRGN, multi-resistance Gram-negative). Strains marked with an asterisk were included in the experimental evolution. Activity determination of the unevolved (dark grey) and evolved (R15, blue; R30, green) phages against the bacterial collection by spot assay overlay (heat map). b Percentual (white lettering) and absolute (black lettering) infectivity of each phage among the bacterial collection. Vertical dotted line represents the percentage of bacterial strains susceptible to at least one phage (62.5%). 37.5% (30 strains) of bacterial strains were not susceptible to any phage (CRS, completely resistant strains). c Representation of the infectivity gains and losses of the evolved phages. An infectivity gain (yellow bar) is defined as the capability of an evolved phage to infect a bacterial strain that was initially not susceptible to the phage’s genomically closest unevolved progenitor phage. A loss of infectivity (red bar) occurred when a bacterial strain is susceptible to the unevolved ancestral phage but resistant to the corresponding evolved phage. d Representation of the cumulated infectivity gains of the evolved phages among the evolution strains (ES) or all strains (AS, excluding the ES and CRS). Among the ES (n = 8), three strains (stacked blue boxes, numbers at the side of the boxes indicate the infectivity gains on the according strain) resulted in 14 infectivity gains (Paer85, 8 gains; PAO1, 4 gains; Paer09, 2 gains). The 53 infectivity gains among AS (n = 42) correspond to gains on 22 strains (stacked grey boxes, numbers at the side of the boxes indicate the infectivity gains on the according strain). For direct comparability of the two strain populations (ES and AS), the cumulated values were divided by the number of strains in each group, resulting in averaged gains per strain (yellow circles).CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 3 Antibiofilm and antimicrobial activity of unevolved and evolved phages. a qPCR-determined bacterial load (CFU/bead) of 24 h pre-established Paer09 (included in the evolution) biofilm untreated (GC) and after co-incubation (3, 6 and 24 h) with phage FJK (unevolved), FJK.R9-15 (15 rounds of evolution) and FJK.R9-30 (30 rounds of evolution). The p-values are 0.0365 (6 h, FJK vs. FJK.R9-15), 0.0010 (6 h, FJK vs. FJK.R9-30) and 0.0242 (24 h, FJK vs. FJK.R9-30). b Heat flow (µW) curves measured for 48 h of Paer09 biofilm co-incubated with phage FJK, FJK.R9-15, FJK.R9-30, or untreated (GC, dashed line). Vertical dotted lines indicate the minimum heat flow (µW values in the right upper corner) detected in each treated sample, related to the highest suppressive effect of the phage on bacterial cells. The p-value is 0.0004 (FJK vs. FJK.R9-15/30). c, d Respective heat (J) curves of phage-treated Paer09 biofilm and the calculated suppression time for each tested condition. The p-values are 0.0014 (FJK vs. FJK.R9-15) and 0.0085 (FJK vs. FJK.R9-30). Identical setup for Paer57 (included in the evolution) treated with phage MK, MK.R57-15, MK.R57-30 or untreated (GC). The p-values are 0.0032 (e, 3 h, MK.R57-15 vs. MK.R57-30), 0.0493 (e, 24 h, MK vs. MK.R57-15), 0.0431 (e, 24 h, MK vs. MK.R57-30), 0.0056 (f, MK vs. MK.R57-15), 0.0053 (f, MK vs. MK.R57-30) and <0.0001 (h, MK vs. MK.R57-15/30). Identical setup for Paer36 (not included in the evolution) treated with phage MK, MK.R3-15, MK.R3-30 or untreated (GC). The p-values are 0.0067 (i, 6 h, MK.R3-15 vs. MK.R3-30), 0.0182 (j, MK vs. MK.R3-30), 0.0369 (j, MK.R3-15 vs. MK.R3-30), 0.0105 (l, MK vs. MK.R3-30) and 0.0012 (l, MK.R3-15 vs. MK.R3-30). All experiments were conducted in fourfold and the curves (b, c, f, g, j, k) display the mean. The error bars represent the standard error of the mean. Statistical analysis was conducted by unpaired two-tailed Student’s t test and p-values indicated with asterisks (*, p = <0.05; **, p = <0.01; ***, p = <0.001; ****, p = <0.0001). Source data are provided as a source data file.
Fig. 3 Antibiofilm and antimicrobial activity of unevolved and evolved phages. a qPCR-determined bacterial load (CFU/bead) of 24 h pre-established Paer09 (included in the evolution) biofilm untreated (GC) and after co-incubation (3, 6 and 24 h) with phage FJK (unevolved), FJK.R9-15 (15 rounds of evolution) and FJK.R9-30 (30 rounds of evolution). The p-values are 0.0365 (6 h, FJK vs. FJK.R9-15), 0.0010 (6 h, FJK vs. FJK.R9-30) and 0.0242 (24 h, FJK vs. FJK.R9-30). b Heat flow (µW) curves measured for 48 h of Paer09 biofilm co-incubated with phage FJK, FJK.R9-15, FJK.R9-30, or untreated (GC, dashed line). Vertical dotted lines indicate the minimum heat flow (µW values in the right upper corner) detected in each treated sample, related to the highest suppressive effect of the phage on bacterial cells. The p-value is 0.0004 (FJK vs. FJK.R9-15/30). c, d Respective heat (J) curves of phage-treated Paer09 biofilm and the calculated suppression time for each tested condition. The p-values are 0.0014 (FJK vs. FJK.R9-15) and 0.0085 (FJK vs. FJK.R9-30). Identical setup for Paer57 (included in the evolution) treated with phage MK, MK.R57-15, MK.R57-30 or untreated (GC). The p-values are 0.0032 (e, 3 h, MK.R57-15 vs. MK.R57-30), 0.0493 (e, 24 h, MK vs. MK.R57-15), 0.0431 (e, 24 h, MK vs. MK.R57-30), 0.0056 (f, MK vs. MK.R57-15), 0.0053 (f, MK vs. MK.R57-30) and <0.0001 (h, MK vs. MK.R57-15/30). Identical setup for Paer36 (not included in the evolution) treated with phage MK, MK.R3-15, MK.R3-30 or untreated (GC). The p-values are 0.0067 (i, 6 h, MK.R3-15 vs. MK.R3-30), 0.0182 (j, MK vs. MK.R3-30), 0.0369 (j, MK.R3-15 vs. MK.R3-30), 0.0105 (l, MK vs. MK.R3-30) and 0.0012 (l, MK.R3-15 vs. MK.R3-30). All experiments were conducted in fourfold and the curves (b, c, f, g, j, k) display the mean. The error bars represent the standard error of the mean. Statistical analysis was conducted by unpaired two-tailed Student’s t test and p-values indicated with asterisks (*, p = <0.05; **, p = <0.01; ***, p = <0.001; ****, p = <0.0001). Source data are provided as a source data file.CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 4 Schematic genome representation of the evolved phages. a–c For each bacteriophage (phage) genus, a genome map is provided for the ancestral phage (FJK, FIM, or MK/JS) with the relevant functional annotations highlighted on top. Each coloured arrow represents a coding sequence with white encoding hypothetical proteins, blue (DNA) metabolism-associated proteins, green virion proteins, and red genome packaging or cell lysis proteins. The genomic changes in the evolved phages after round 15 and round 30 are displayed below each ancestral phage genome, with deletions being shown as a delta symbol and the individual SNPs annotated. For the Pakpunavirus members, a BLAST comparison between both ancestral phages is also shown. d Tertiary structure prediction of EPS depolymerase FJK_gp62. In red, the cysteine residue on position 98 is highlighted, which is mutated to the aromatic amino acid phenylalanine in the evolved phage.
Fig. 4 Schematic genome representation of the evolved phages. a–c For each bacteriophage (phage) genus, a genome map is provided for the ancestral phage (FJK, FIM, or MK/JS) with the relevant functional annotations highlighted on top. Each coloured arrow represents a coding sequence with white encoding hypothetical proteins, blue (DNA) metabolism-associated proteins, green virion proteins, and red genome packaging or cell lysis proteins. The genomic changes in the evolved phages after round 15 and round 30 are displayed below each ancestral phage genome, with deletions being shown as a delta symbol and the individual SNPs annotated. For the Pakpunavirus members, a BLAST comparison between both ancestral phages is also shown. d Tertiary structure prediction of EPS depolymerase FJK_gp62. In red, the cysteine residue on position 98 is highlighted, which is mutated to the aromatic amino acid phenylalanine in the evolved phage.CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 5 Phenotypic and genomic characterisation of phage-treated Paer09 isolates. a Efficiency of plating (EOP) of five bacteriophages (phages) (FJK, FJK.R9-15, FJK.R9-30, MK, and MK.R3-15) for 48 Paer09 strains treated with individual phages (FJK, FJK.R9-15, FJK.R9-30). The EOP is defined as the concentration ratio of a phage on the phage-treated isolate (numerator) and the naive Paer09 strain (denominator; Control). An EOP above 10 was considered as increased efficiency (green), while an EOP of 0.1 to 10 was ranked as unchanged efficiency (grey). A reduced efficiency was defined as an EOP between 0.001 and 0.1 (light blue). When no individual plaques were visible or the EOP was equal to or under 0.001 the isolate was determined resistant to the phage (blue). Mutation-associated protein of each strain with amino acid change in parentheses. A lack of labelling refers to isolates in which no apparent mutation could be identified. b Illustration of the cumulative number of isolates by mutant protein. c Illustration of the number of isolates by mutant protein according to the treatment group (phage FJK; phage FJK.R9-15; phage FJK.R9-30). Optical density (OD600) measurements of a three-day co-incubation of planktonic naive Paer09 strain with phage FJK (d), phage FJK.R9-15 (e) and phage FJK.R9-30 (f) at an MOI of 0.001. The thin black lines represent each individual replicate (n = 8), and the thick coloured line represents the average. For phages FJK.R9-15/30 the completely suppressed replicate was excluded from the average calculation. g Illustration of the averaged co-incubation curves for phages FJK (grey line; panel d), FJK.R9-15 (violet line; e) and FJK.R9-30 (yellow line; f) over three days in comparison to a growth control (dotted black line) and negative control (black line). Source data are provided as a source data file.
Fig. 5 Phenotypic and genomic characterisation of phage-treated Paer09 isolates. a Efficiency of plating (EOP) of five bacteriophages (phages) (FJK, FJK.R9-15, FJK.R9-30, MK, and MK.R3-15) for 48 Paer09 strains treated with individual phages (FJK, FJK.R9-15, FJK.R9-30). The EOP is defined as the concentration ratio of a phage on the phage-treated isolate (numerator) and the naive Paer09 strain (denominator; Control). An EOP above 10 was considered as increased efficiency (green), while an EOP of 0.1 to 10 was ranked as unchanged efficiency (grey). A reduced efficiency was defined as an EOP between 0.001 and 0.1 (light blue). When no individual plaques were visible or the EOP was equal to or under 0.001 the isolate was determined resistant to the phage (blue). Mutation-associated protein of each strain with amino acid change in parentheses. A lack of labelling refers to isolates in which no apparent mutation could be identified. b Illustration of the cumulative number of isolates by mutant protein. c Illustration of the number of isolates by mutant protein according to the treatment group (phage FJK; phage FJK.R9-15; phage FJK.R9-30). Optical density (OD600) measurements of a three-day co-incubation of planktonic naive Paer09 strain with phage FJK (d), phage FJK.R9-15 (e) and phage FJK.R9-30 (f) at an MOI of 0.001. The thin black lines represent each individual replicate (n = 8), and the thick coloured line represents the average. For phages FJK.R9-15/30 the completely suppressed replicate was excluded from the average calculation. g Illustration of the averaged co-incubation curves for phages FJK (grey line; panel d), FJK.R9-15 (violet line; e) and FJK.R9-30 (yellow line; f) over three days in comparison to a growth control (dotted black line) and negative control (black line). Source data are provided as a source data file.CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 6 Antibiofilm and antimicrobial activity of the phage cocktail. a Efficiency of plating (EOP) of five phages (FJK, FJK.R9-15, FJK.R9-30, MK, and MK.R3-15) on 18 Paer09 strains treated with the phage cocktail (FJK.R9-30 + MK.R3-15). EOP is defined within the methods. Mutation-associated protein of each strain with amino acid change in parentheses (1c.203_204dupTC p.R69fs and 2c.205delA p.R69fs). Lack of labelling refers to isolates with no apparent mutation. b Illustration of the number of isolates by mutant protein and treatment group (FJK; FJK.R9-15; FJK.R9-30; Cocktail). c qPCR-determined bacterial load (CFU/bead) of 24 h pre-established Paer09 biofilm untreated (GC) and after co-incubation (3, 6 and 24 h) with FJK.R9-30 or the cocktail. The p-value is 0.0077 (6 h, Cocktail vs. FJK.R9-30). d, e Heat flow (µW) and heat (J) curves measured for 48, 72 and 96 h of Paer09 biofilm co-incubated with MK.R3-15, FJK.R9-30, cocktail (individual replicates) or untreated (GC, dashed black line). Minimum heat flow values in the right upper corner (d). The p-values are 0.0404 (FJK.R9-30 vs. Cocktail) and 0.0024 (MK.R3-15 vs. Cocktail). f Calculated lag time (h) from the heat curves for each tested condition. The p-values are 0.0051 (FJK.R9-30 vs. Cocktail) and 0.0002 (MK.R3-15 vs. Cocktail). OD600 measurement of a seven-day (g) and three-day (h) co-incubation of planktonic naive Paer09 strain with the cocktail (MOI: 0.001, g; MOI: 0.0001, h). Thin lines represent the individual replicates (n = 8), and the thick coloured line the average, excluding completely suppressed replicates (n = 4, g; n = 2, h). i Illustration of averaged co-incubation curves (including grey, violet, and yellow curves from Fig. 5d) over three days compared to a growth control (dotted black line) and negative control (black line). The cocktail (MOI: 0.0001) is shown as a dotted green curve. All experiments were performed in fourfold and unless specified otherwise, the calorimetric curves (d, e) display the mean. The error bars represent the standard error of the mean. Statistical analysis was conducted by unpaired two-tailed Student’s t test and p-values indicated with asterisks (*p = <0.05; **p = <0.01; ***p = <0.001). Source data are provided as a source data file.
Fig. 6 Antibiofilm and antimicrobial activity of the phage cocktail. a Efficiency of plating (EOP) of five phages (FJK, FJK.R9-15, FJK.R9-30, MK, and MK.R3-15) on 18 Paer09 strains treated with the phage cocktail (FJK.R9-30 + MK.R3-15). EOP is defined within the methods. Mutation-associated protein of each strain with amino acid change in parentheses (1c.203_204dupTC p.R69fs and 2c.205delA p.R69fs). Lack of labelling refers to isolates with no apparent mutation. b Illustration of the number of isolates by mutant protein and treatment group (FJK; FJK.R9-15; FJK.R9-30; Cocktail). c qPCR-determined bacterial load (CFU/bead) of 24 h pre-established Paer09 biofilm untreated (GC) and after co-incubation (3, 6 and 24 h) with FJK.R9-30 or the cocktail. The p-value is 0.0077 (6 h, Cocktail vs. FJK.R9-30). d, e Heat flow (µW) and heat (J) curves measured for 48, 72 and 96 h of Paer09 biofilm co-incubated with MK.R3-15, FJK.R9-30, cocktail (individual replicates) or untreated (GC, dashed black line). Minimum heat flow values in the right upper corner (d). The p-values are 0.0404 (FJK.R9-30 vs. Cocktail) and 0.0024 (MK.R3-15 vs. Cocktail). f Calculated lag time (h) from the heat curves for each tested condition. The p-values are 0.0051 (FJK.R9-30 vs. Cocktail) and 0.0002 (MK.R3-15 vs. Cocktail). OD600 measurement of a seven-day (g) and three-day (h) co-incubation of planktonic naive Paer09 strain with the cocktail (MOI: 0.001, g; MOI: 0.0001, h). Thin lines represent the individual replicates (n = 8), and the thick coloured line the average, excluding completely suppressed replicates (n = 4, g; n = 2, h). i Illustration of averaged co-incubation curves (including grey, violet, and yellow curves from Fig. 5d) over three days compared to a growth control (dotted black line) and negative control (black line). The cocktail (MOI: 0.0001) is shown as a dotted green curve. All experiments were performed in fourfold and unless specified otherwise, the calorimetric curves (d, e) display the mean. The error bars represent the standard error of the mean. Statistical analysis was conducted by unpaired two-tailed Student’s t test and p-values indicated with asterisks (*p = <0.05; **p = <0.01; ***p = <0.001). Source data are provided as a source data file.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Research works printed but not linked: 105

  1. Centers for Disease, C., Prevention, National Center for Emerging, Z., Infectious Diseases. Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion. Antibiotic Resistance, C. & Strategy, U. Antibiotic resistance threats in the United States, 2019. https://doi.org/10.15620/cdc:82532 (2019). · DOI · Paper page
  2. Nathwani, D., Raman, G., Sulham, K., Gavaghan, M. & Menon, V. Clinical and economic consequences of hospital-acquired resistant and multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Antimicrob. Resist. Infect. Control 3, 32 (2014). · DOI
  3. Pang, Z., Raudonis, R., Glick, B. R., Lin, T.-J. & Cheng, Z. Antibiotic resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: mechanisms and alternative therapeutic strategies. Biotechnol. Adv. 37, 177–192 (2019). · DOI
  4. Langendonk, R. F., Neill, D. R. & Fothergill, J. L. The building blocks of antimicrobial resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: implications for current resistance-breaking therapies. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 11 https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2021.665759 (2021). · DOI
  5. Costerton, J. W. Cystic fibrosis pathogenesis and the role of biofilms in persistent infection. Trends Microbiol. 9, 50–52 (2001). · DOI
  6. Potera, C. Forging a link between biofilms and disease. Science 283, 1837–1839 (1999). · DOI
  7. Frølund, B., Palmgren, R., Keiding, K. & Nielsen, P. H. Extraction of extracellular polymers from activated sludge using a cation exchange resin. Water Res. 30, 1749–1758 (1996). · DOI
  8. Mann, E. E. & Wozniak, D. J. Pseudomonas biofilm matrix composition and niche biology. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 36, 893–916 (2012). · DOI
  9. Thi, M. T. T., Wibowo, D. & Rehm, B. H. A. Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 21, 8671 (2020). · DOI
  10. Rasamiravaka, T., Labtani, Q., Duez, P. & El Jaziri, M. The formation of biofilms by Pseudomonas aeruginosa: a review of the natural and synthetic compounds interfering with control mechanisms. BioMed. Res. Int. 2015, 759348 (2015). · DOI
  11. Flemming, H.-C. et al. Biofilms: an emergent form of bacterial life. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 14, 563–575 (2016). · DOI · Paper page
  12. Mulcahy, L. R., Isabella, V. M. & Lewis, K. Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms in disease. Microb. Ecol. 68, 1–12 (2014). · DOI
  13. Fong, S. A. et al. Activity of bacteriophages in removing biofilms of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates from chronic rhinosinusitis patients. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 7, 418–418 (2017). · DOI
  14. Forti, F. et al. Design of a broad-range bacteriophage cocktail that reduces Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms and treats acute infections in two animal models. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 62, e02573–17 (2018). · DOI
  15. Yan, J., Mao, J. & Xie, J. Bacteriophage polysaccharide depolymerases and biomedical applications. BioDrugs 28, 265–274 (2014). · DOI
  16. Glonti, T., Chanishvili, N. & Taylor, P. W. Bacteriophage-derived enzyme that depolymerizes the alginic acid capsule associated with cystic fibrosis isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J. Appl. Microbiol. 108, 695–702 (2010). · DOI
  17. Olszak, T. et al. The O-specific polysaccharide lyase from the phage LKA1 tailspike reduces Pseudomonas virulence. Sci. Rep. 7, 16302 (2017). · DOI
  18. Knecht, L. E., Veljkovic, M. & Fieseler, L. Diversity and function of phage encoded depolymerases. Front. Microbiol. 10, 2949 (2019). · DOI
  19. Mi, L. et al. Identification of a lytic Pseudomonas aeruginosa phage depolymerase and its anti-biofilm effect and bactericidal contribution to serum. Virus Genes 55, 394–405 (2019). · DOI
  20. Guo, M. et al. A novel antimicrobial endolysin, LysPA26, against Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Front. Microbiol. 8, 293 (2017). · DOI
  21. Hanlon, G. W., Denyer, S. P., Olliff, C. J. & Ibrahim, L. J. Reduction in exopolysaccharide viscosity as an aid to bacteriophage penetration through Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 67, 2746–2753 (2001). · DOI
  22. Pires, D. P., Oliveira, H., Melo, L. D. R., Sillankorva, S. & Azeredo, J. Bacteriophage-encoded depolymerases: their diversity and biotechnological applications. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 100, 2141–2151 (2016). · DOI
  23. Latka, A., Maciejewska, B., Majkowska-Skrobek, G., Briers, Y. & Drulis-Kawa, Z. Bacteriophage-encoded virion-associated enzymes to overcome the carbohydrate barriers during the infection process. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 101, 3103–3119 (2017). · DOI
  24. Visnapuu, A., Van der Gucht, M., Wagemans, J. & Lavigne, R. Deconstructing the phage-bacterial biofilm interaction as a basis to establish new antibiofilm strategies. Viruses 14, 1057 (2022). · DOI
  25. Pearl, S., Gabay, C., Kishony, R., Oppenheim, A. & Balaban, N. Q. Nongenetic individuality in the host-phage interaction. PLOS Biol. 6, e120 (2008). · DOI
  26. Chan, B. K., Abedon, S. T. & Loc-Carrillo, C. Phage cocktails and the future of phage therapy. Future Microbiol. 8, 769–783 (2013). · DOI
  27. Merabishvili, M., Pirnay, J.-P. & De Vos, D. Guidelines to Compose an Ideal Bacteriophage Cocktail. Bacteriophage Therapy: From Lab to Clinical Practice, 99–110 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-7395-8_9 (2018). · DOI
  28. Abedon, S. T., Danis-Wlodarczyk, K. M. & Wozniak, D. J. Phage cocktail development for bacteriophage therapy: toward improving spectrum of activity breadth and depth. Pharmaceuticals 14, 1019 (2021). · DOI
  29. Borin, J. M., Avrani, S., Barrick, J. E., Petrie, K. L. & Meyer, J. R. Coevolutionary phage training leads to greater bacterial suppression and delays the evolution of phage resistance. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 118, e2104592118 (2021). · DOI
  30. Betts, A., Vasse, M., Kaltz, O. & Hochberg, M. E. Back to the future: evolving bacteriophages to increase their effectiveness against the pathogen Pseudomonas aeruginosa PAO1. Evolut. Appl. 6, 1054–1063 (2013). · DOI
  31. Burmeister, A. R., Sullivan, R. M., Gallie, J. & Lenski, R. E. Sustained coevolution of phage Lambda and Escherichia coli involves inner- as well as outer-membrane defences and counter-defences. Microbiology 167, 001063 (2021). · DOI
  32. Mapes, A. C., Trautner, B. W., Liao, K. S. & Ramig, R. F. Development of expanded host range phage active on biofilms of multi-drug resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Bacteriophage 6, e1096995 (2016). · DOI
  33. Favor, A. H., Llanos, C. D., Youngblut, M. D. & Bardales, J. A. Optimizing bacteriophage engineering through an accelerated evolution platform. Sci. Rep. 10, 13981 (2020). · DOI
  34. Kering, K. K., Zhang, X., Nyaruaba, R., Yu, J. & Wei, H. Application of adaptive evolution to improve the stability of bacteriophages during storage. Viruses 12, 423 (2020). · DOI
  35. Akusobi, C., Chan, B. K., Williams, E. S. C. P., Wertz, J. E. & Turner, P. E. Parallel evolution of host-attachment proteins in phage PP01 populations adapting to Escherichia coli O157:H7. Pharmaceuticals 11, 60 (2018). · DOI
  36. Swanson, N. A. et al. Cryo-EM structure of the periplasmic tunnel of T7 DNA-ejectosome at 2.7 Å resolution. Mol. Cell 81, 3145–3159.e7 (2021). · DOI
  37. Pyra, A. et al. Tail tubular protein A: a dual-function tail protein of Klebsiella pneumoniae bacteriophage KP32. Sci. Rep. 7, 2223 (2017). · DOI
  38. Schwarzer, D., Stummeyer, K., Gerardy-Schahn, R. & Mühlenhoff, M. Characterization of a novel intramolecular chaperone domain conserved in endosialidases and other bacteriophage tail spike and fiber proteins. J. Biol. Chem. 282, 2821–2831 (2007). · DOI
  39. Morley, T. J., Willis, L. M., Whitfield, C., Wakarchuk, W. W. & Withers, S. G. A new sialidase mechanism: bacteriophage K1F endo-sialidase is an inverting glycosidase. J. Biol. Chem. 284, 17404–17410 (2009). · DOI
  40. Jakobsson, E., Schwarzer, D., Jokilammi, A. & Finne, J. Endosialidases: versatile tools for the study of polysialic acid. Top. Curr. Chem. 367, 29–73 (2015). · DOI
  41. Haggård-Liungquist, E. et al. Bacteriophage P2: genes involved in baseplate assembly. Virology 213, 109–121 (1995). · DOI
  42. Gil, F. et al. The lytic cassette of mycobacteriophage Ms6 encodes an enzyme with lipolytic activity. Microbiology 154, 1364–1371 (2008). · DOI
  43. Poon, K. K. H., Westman, E. L., Vinogradov, E., Jin, S. & Lam, J. S. Functional characterization of MigA and WapR: putative rhamnosyltransferases involved in outer core oligosaccharide biosynthesis of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J. Bacteriol. 190, 1857–1865 (2008). · DOI
  44. Rahim, R., Burrows, L. L., Monteiro, M. A., Perry, M. B. & Lam, J. S. Involvement of the RML locus in core oligosaccharide and O polysaccharide assembly in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Microbiology 146, 2803–2814 (2000). · DOI
  45. Elamin, A. A. et al. Novel drug targets in cell wall biosynthesis exploited by gene disruption in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. PLoS One 12, e0186801 (2017). · DOI
  46. Alphey, M. S. et al. Allosteric competitive inhibitors of the glucose-1-phosphate thymidylyltransferase (RmlA) from Pseudomonas aeruginosa. ACS Chem. Biol. 8, 387–396 (2013). · DOI
  47. Huszczynski, S. M., Lam, J. S. & Khursigara, C. M. The role of Pseudomonas aeruginosa lipopolysaccharide in bacterial pathogenesis and physiology. Pathogens 9, 6 (2020). · DOI
  48. Overhage, J., Schemionek, M., Webb, J. S. & Rehm, B. H. A. Expression of the psl operon in Pseudomonas aeruginosa PAO1 biofilms: PslA performs an essential function in biofilm formation. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 71, 4407–4413 (2005). · DOI
  49. Sackman, A. M. et al. Mutation-driven parallel evolution during viral adaptation. Mol. Biol. Evol. 34, 3243–3253 (2017). · DOI
  50. Perry, E. B., Barrick, J. E. & Bohannan, B. J. The molecular and genetic basis of repeatable coevolution between Escherichia coli and bacteriophage T3 in a laboratory microcosm. PLoS One 10, e0130639 (2015). · DOI
  51. Bull, J. J. et al. Exceptional convergent evolution in a virus. Genetics 147, 1497–1507 (1997). · DOI
  52. Esvelt, K. M., Carlson, J. C. & Liu, D. R. A system for the continuous directed evolution of biomolecules. Nature 472, 499–503 (2011). · DOI
  53. Wichman, H. A., Badgett, M. R., Scott, L. A., Boulianne, C. M. & Bull, J. J. Different trajectories of parallel evolution during viral adaptation. Science 285, 422–424 (1999). · DOI
  54. Schmerer, M., Molineux, I. J. & Bull, J. J. Synergy as a rationale for phage therapy using phage cocktails. PeerJ 2, e590 (2014). · DOI
  55. Niu, Y. D. et al. Efficacy of individual bacteriophages does not predict efficacy of bacteriophage cocktails for control of Escherichia coli O157. Front. Microbiol. 12, 616712 (2021). · DOI
  56. Sharma, S. et al. Bacteriophages and its applications: an overview. Folia Microbiol. 62, 17–55 (2017). · DOI
  57. Połaska, M. & Sokołowska, B. Bacteriophages—a new hope or a huge problem in the food industry. AIMS Microbiol. 5, 324–346 (2019). · DOI
  58. Sigg, A. P. et al. A method to determine the efficacy of a commercial phage preparation against uropathogens in urine and artificial urine determined by isothermal microcalorimetry. Microorganisms 10, 845 (2022). · DOI
  59. Tkhilaishvili, T. et al. Real-time assessment of bacteriophage T3-derived antimicrobial activity against planktonic and biofilm-embedded Escherichia coli by isothermal microcalorimetry. Res. Microbiol. 169, 515–521 (2018). · DOI
  60. Łusiak-Szelachowska, M., Weber-Dąbrowska, B. & Górski, A. Bacteriophages and lysins in biofilm control. Virol. Sin. 35, 125–133 (2020). · DOI
  61. Eskenazi, A. et al. Combination of pre-adapted bacteriophage therapy and antibiotics for treatment of fracture-related infection due to pandrug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae. Nat. Commun. 13, 302 (2022). · DOI
  62. Gordillo Altamirano, F. L. & Barr, J. J. Unlocking the next generation of phage therapy: the key is in the receptors. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 68, 115–123 (2021). · DOI
  63. Yang, Y. et al. Development of a bacteriophage cocktail to constrain the emergence of phage-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Front. Microbiol. 11, 327 (2020). · DOI
  64. Chen, B. et al. Alginate microbeads and hydrogels delivering meropenem and bacteriophages to treat Pseudomonas aeruginosa fracture-related infections. J. Control. Rel. 364, 159–173 (2023). · DOI
  65. Castledine, M. et al. Parallel evolution of Pseudomonas aeruginosa phage resistance and virulence loss in response to phage treatment in vivo and in vitro. eLife 11, e73679 (2022). · DOI
  66. Nair, A. & Khairnar, K. Genetically engineered phages for therapeutics: proceed with caution. Nat. Med. 25, 1028–1028 (2019). · DOI
  67. Commission for Hospital Hygiene and Infection Prevention (KRINKO). Supplement to the KRINKO recommendation ‘Hygiene measures for infections or colonisation with multi-resistant Gram-negative rods’ (2012) in connection with the new category ‘I’ defined by EUCAST in the determination of antibiotic resistance: consequences for the definition of MRGN. Epidemiol. Bull. 9, 82–83 (2019).
  68. Wolfensberger, A., Kuster, S. P., Marchesi, M., Zbinden, R. & Hombach, M. The effect of varying multidrug-resistence (MDR) definitions on rates of MDR Gram-negative rods. Antimicrob. Resist. Infect. Control 8, 193 (2019). · DOI
  69. Wang, L., Tkhilaishvili, T., Bernal Andres, B., Trampuz, A. & Gonzalez Moreno, M. Bacteriophage-antibiotic combinations against ciprofloxacin/ceftriaxone-resistant Escherichia coli in vitro and in an experimental Galleria mellonella model. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 56, 106200 (2020). · DOI
  70. Kunisch, F. & Gonzalez Moreno, M. Protocol Exchange, PROTOCOL (Version 1) available at https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.pex-1886/v1, (2023). · DOI
  71. Kunisch, F., Ponce Benavente, L. & Gonzalez Moreno, M. Protocol Exchange, PROTOCOL (Version 1) available at https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.pex-1953/v1, (2023). · DOI
  72. Kunisch, F., Wagemans, J. & Gonzalez Moreno, M. Protocol Exchange, PROTOCOL (Version 1) available at https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.pex-1956/v1, (2023). · DOI
  73. Zhang, Z., Schwartz, S., Wagner, L. & Miller, W. A greedy algorithm for aligning DNA sequences. J. Comput. Biol. 7, 203–214 (2000). · DOI
  74. Schneider, C. A., Rasband, W. S. & Eliceiri, K. W. NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat. Methods 9, 671–675 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  75. Burrowes, B. H., Molineux, I. J. & Fralick, J. A. Directed in vitro evolution of therapeutic bacteriophages: the Appelmans protocol. Viruses 11, 241 (2019). · DOI
  76. Braissant, O. et al. Isothermal microcalorimetry accurately detects bacteria, tumorous microtissues, and parasitic worms in a label-free well-plate assay. Biotechnol. J. 10, 460–468 (2015). · DOI
  77. Braissant, O., Wirz, D., Göpfert, B. & Daniels, A. U. Use of isothermal microcalorimetry to monitor microbial activities. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 303, 1–8 (2010). · DOI
  78. Butini, M. E. et al. Real-time antimicrobial susceptibility assay of planktonic and biofilm bacteria by isothermal microcalorimetry. Adv. Microbiol., Infect. Dis. Public Health.: Vol. 13, 61–77 (2019).
  79. Lood, C. et al. Genomics of an endemic cystic fibrosis Burkholderia multivorans strain reveals low within-patient evolution but high between-patient diversity. PLOS Pathog. 17, e1009418 (2021). · DOI
  80. Wick, R. R., Judd, L. M., Gorrie, C. L. & Holt, K. E. Unicycler: resolving bacterial genome assemblies from short and long sequencing reads. PLOS Comput. Biol. 13, e1005595 (2017). · DOI
  81. Wick, R. R., Schultz, M. B., Zobel, J. & Holt, K. E. Bandage: interactive visualization of de novo genome assemblies. Bioinformatics 31, 3350–3352 (2015). · DOI
  82. Seemann, T. Prokka: rapid prokaryotic genome annotation. Bioinformatics 30, 2068–2069 (2014). · DOI
  83. Stamatakis, A. RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics 30, 1312–1313 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  84. Letunic, I. & Bork, P. Interactive Tree Of Life (iTOL) v4: recent updates and new developments. Nucleic Acids Res. 47, W256–W259 (2019). · DOI
  85. Kunisch, F., Wagemans, J. & Gonzalez Moreno, M. Protocol Exchange, PROTOCOL (Version 1) available at https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.pex-1955/v1, (2023). · DOI
  86. Makalatia, K. et al. Characterization of Salmonella isolates from various geographical regions of the caucasus and their susceptibility to bacteriophages. Viruses 12, 1418 (2020). · DOI
  87. Bankevich, A. et al. SPAdes: a new genome assembly algorithm and its applications to single-cell sequencing. J. Comput. Biol. 19, 455–477 (2012). · DOI
  88. Moraru, C., Varsani, A. & Kropinski, A. M. VIRIDIC-A novel tool to calculate the intergenomic similarities of prokaryote-infecting viruses. Viruses 12, 1268 (2020). · DOI
  89. Tamura, K., Stecher, G. & Kumar, S. MEGA11: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 11. Mol. Biol. Evol. 38, 3022–3027 (2021). · DOI
  90. Altschul, S. F. et al. Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res. 25, 3389–3402 (1997). · DOI · Paper page
  91. Söding, J., Biegert, A. & Lupas, A. N. The HHpred interactive server for protein homology detection and structure prediction. Nucleic Acids Res. 33, W244–W248 (2005). · DOI
  92. Remmert, M., Biegert, A., Hauser, A. & Söding, J. HHblits: lightning-fast iterative protein sequence searching by HMM-HMM alignment. Nat. Methods 9, 173–175 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  93. Wheeler, T. J. & Eddy, S. R. nhmmer: DNA homology search with profile HMMs. Bioinformatics 29, 2487–2489 (2013). · DOI
  94. Gabler, F. et al. Protein sequence analysis using the MPI Bioinformatics Toolkit. Curr. Protoc. Bioinforma. 72, e108 (2020). · DOI · Paper page
  95. Rutherford, K. et al. Artemis: sequence visualization and annotation. Bioinformatics 16, 944–945 (2000). · DOI
  96. Sullivan, M. J., Petty, N. K. & Beatson, S. A. Easyfig: a genome comparison visualizer. Bioinformatics 27, 1009–1010 (2011). · DOI
  97. Holm, L. DALI and the persistence of protein shape. Protein Sci. 29, 128–140 (2020). · DOI
  98. DeLano, W. Use of PyMOL as a communications tool for molecular science. Abstr. Pap. Am. Chem. Soc. 228, U313–U314 (2004).
  99. Liu, H., Niu, Y. D., Li, J., Stanford, K. & McAllister, T. A. Rapid and accurate detection of bacteriophage activity against Escherichia coli O157:H7 by propidium monoazide real-time PCR. BioMed. Res. Int. 2014, 319351 (2014). · DOI
  100. Kropinski, A. M., Mazzocco, A., Waddell, T. E., Lingohr, E. & Johnson, R. P. Enumeration of bacteriophages by double agar overlay plaque assay. Methods Mol. Biol. 501, 69–76 (2009). · DOI
  101. Abedon, S. T. & Katsaounis, T. I. Basic phage mathematics. Methods Mol. Biol. 1681, 3–30 (2018). · DOI
  102. Viazis, S., Akhtar, M., Feirtag, J., Brabban, A. D. & Diez-Gonzalez, F. Isolation and characterization of lytic bacteriophages against enterohaemorrhagic Escherichia coli. J. Appl. Microbiol. 110, 1323–1331 (2011). · DOI
  103. Loh, J. M. S., Adenwalla, N., Wiles, S. & Proft, T. Galleria mellonella larvae as an infection model for group A streptococcus. Virulence 4, 419–428 (2013). · DOI
  104. Tkhilaishvili, T., Wang, L., Tavanti, A., Trampuz, A. & Di Luca, M. Antibacterial efficacy of two commercially available bacteriophage formulations, staphylococcal bacteriophage and PYO bacteriophage, against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: prevention and eradication of biofilm formation and control of a systemic infection of Galleria mellonella larvae. Front. Microbiol. 11, 110 (2020). · DOI
  105. Howell, M., Wirz, D., Daniels, A. U. & Braissant, O. Application of a microcalorimetric method for determining drug susceptibility in Mycobacterium species. J. Clin. Microbiol. 50, 16–20 (2012). · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Kunisch, F., Campobasso, C., Wagemans, J., Yildirim, S., Chan, B. K., Schaudinn, C., Lavigne, R., Turner, P. E., Raschke, M. J., Trampuz, A., & Gonzalez Moreno, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Münster (DE)
  • University of Pisa (IT)
  • KU Leuven (BE)
  • Yale University (US)
  • Robert Koch Institute (DE)
ORCID
Venue
Nature Communications
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2024-10-03
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
8572-8572
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1038/s41467-024-52595-w
PMC
PMC11450229
OpenAlex
W4403098193
Cited by
101
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 60 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 2
FWCI
27.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Nature Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Publication server of the Robert Koch Institute (Robert Kock Institute) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Lirias (KU Leuven) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (01KI1823)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Virology › Bacteriophages and microbial interactions
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bacterial biofilms and quorum sensing
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
Keywords
Pseudomonas aeruginosa, biofilm, phage therapy, multidrug resistance, host range expansion, antibiofilm activity, isothermal microcalorimetry, real-time PCR
MeSH terms
Phage Therapy, Anti-Bacterial Agents, Bacteriophages, Humans, Microbial Sensitivity Tests, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Pseudomonas Infections, Pseudomonas Phages, Biofilms, Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial, Host Specificity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Targeting Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilm with an evolutionary trained bacteriophage cocktail exploiting phage resistance trade-offs. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/s41467-024-52595-w
The paper
Kunisch, F., Campobasso, C., Wagemans, J., Yildirim, S., Chan, B. K., Schaudinn, C., Lavigne, R., Turner, P. E., Raschke, M. J., Trampuz, A., & Gonzalez Moreno, M. (2024). Targeting Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilm with an evolutionary trained bacteriophage cocktail exploiting phage resistance trade-offs. Nature Communications. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-52595-w