The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Broad impact of extracellular DNA on biofilm formation by clinically isolated Methicillin-resistant and -sensitive strains of Staphylococcus aureus
Open accessAbstract
Staphylococcus aureus is a major causative agent for biofilm-associated infections. Inside biofilms, S. aureus cells are embedded in an extracellular matrix (ECM) composed of polysaccharide-intercellular adhesins (PIA), proteins, and/or extracellular DNA (eDNA). However, the importance of each component and the relationship among them in biofilms of diverse strains are largely unclear. Here, we characterised biofilms formed by 47 S. aureus clinical isolates. In most (42/47) of the strains, biofilm formation was augmented by glucose supplementation. Sodium chloride (NaCl)-triggered biofilm formation was more prevalent in methicillin-sensitive S. aureus (15/24) than in methicillin-resistant strain (1/23). DNase I most effectively inhibited and disrupted massive biofilms, and Proteinase K was also effective. Anti-biofilm effects of Dispersin B, which cleaves PIA, were restricted to PIA-dependent biofilms formed by specific strains and showed significant negative correlations with those of Proteinase K, suggesting independent roles of PIA and proteins in each biofilm. ECM profiling demonstrated that eDNA was present in all strains, although its level differed among strains and culture conditions. These results indicate that eDNA is the most common component in S. aureus biofilms, whereas PIA is important for a small number of isolates. Therefore, eDNA can be a primary target for developing eradication strategies against S. aureus biofilms.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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
Biofilms: an emergent form of bacterial life
Flemming, H.-C., Wingender, J., Szewzyk, U., Steinberg, P., Rice, S. A., & Kjelleberg, S. (2016) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro.2016.94 · Cited by 5,979
Izano, E. A., Amarante, M. A., Kher, W. B., & Kaplan, J. B. (2008) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.02073-07 · Cited by 553
Sadovskaya, I., Vinogradov, E., Flahaut, S., Kogan, G., & Jabbouri, S. (2005) · Infection and Immunity · doi:10.1128/iai.73.5.3007-3017.2005 · Cited by 188
Cited by
Huws, S. A., Creevey, C. J., Oyama, L. B., Mizrahi, I., Denman, S. E., Popova, M., Muñoz-Tamayo, R., Forano, E., Waters, S. M., Hess, M., et al. (2018) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2018.02161 · Cited by 487
Saidi, N., Saderi, H., Owlia, P., & Soleimani, M. (2023) · Advanced Biomedical Research · doi:10.4103/abr.abr_156_21 · Cited by 34
Metadata
- Authors
- Sugimoto, S., Sato, F., Miyakawa, R., Chiba, A., Onodera, S., Hori, S., & Mizunoe, Y.
- Venue
- Scientific Reports
- Published
- 2018-02-02
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 2254-2254
- ISSN
- 2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2790416781
- Cited by
- 171
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 5.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Broad impact of extracellular DNA on biofilm formation by clinically isolated Methicillin-resistant and -sensitive strains of Staphylococcus aureus. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/s41598-018-20485-z
- The paper
- Sugimoto, S., Sato, F., Miyakawa, R., Chiba, A., Onodera, S., Hori, S., & Mizunoe, Y. (2018). Broad impact of extracellular DNA on biofilm formation by clinically isolated Methicillin-resistant and -sensitive strains of Staphylococcus aureus. Scientific Reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-20485-z
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.