The DOI matches its Crossref record; 294 of the 294 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Critical review on biofilm methods
Open accessAbstract
Biofilms are widespread in nature and constitute an important strategy implemented by microorganisms to survive in sometimes harsh environmental conditions. They can be beneficial or have a negative impact particularly when formed in industrial settings or on medical devices. As such, research into the formation and elimination of biofilms is important for many disciplines. Several new methodologies have been recently developed for, or adapted to, biofilm studies that have contributed to deeper knowledge on biofilm physiology, structure and composition. In this review, traditional and cutting-edge methods to study biofilm biomass, viability, structure, composition and physiology are addressed. Moreover, as there is a lack of consensus among the diversity of techniques used to grow and study biofilms. This review intends to remedy this, by giving a critical perspective, highlighting the advantages and limitations of several methods. Accordingly, this review aims at helping scientists in finding the most appropriate and up-to-date methods to study their 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
NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis
Schneider, C. A., Rasband, W. S., & Eliceiri, K. W. (2012) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth.2089 · Cited by 64,638
Bacterial Biofilms: A Common Cause of Persistent Infections
Costerton, J. W., Stewart, P. S., & Greenberg, E. P. (1999) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.284.5418.1318 · Cited by 12,167
Flemming, H.-C., & Wingender, J. (2010) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro2415 · Cited by 10,137
Insights into the regulation of protein abundance from proteomic and transcriptomic analyses
Vogel, C., & Marcotte, E. M. (2012) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg3185 · Cited by 4,195
O'Brien, J., Wilson, I., Orton, T., & Pognan, F. (2000) · European Journal of Biochemistry · doi:10.1046/j.1432-1327.2000.01606.x · Cited by 3,446
Sequence-Selective Recognition of DNA by Strand Displacement with a Thymine-Substituted Polyamide
Nielsen, P. E., Egholm, M., Berg, R. H., & Buchardt, O. (1991) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1962210 · Cited by 3,332
Fabrication of microfluidic systems in poly(dimethylsiloxane)
McDonald, J. C., Duffy, D. C., Anderson, J. R., Chiu, D. T., Wu, H., Schueller, O. J. A., & Whitesides, G. M. (2000) · Electrophoresis · doi:10.1002/(sici)1522-2683(20000101)21:1<27::aid-elps27>3.0.co;2-c · Cited by 3,329
Flagellar and twitching motility are necessary for Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilm development
O'Toole, G. A., & Kolter, R. (1998) · Molecular Microbiology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2958.1998.01062.x · Cited by 2,697
A modified microtiter-plate test for quantification of staphylococcal biofilm formation
Stepanović, S., Vuković, D., Dakić, I., Savić, B., & Švabić-Vlahović, M. (2000) · Journal of Microbiological Methods · doi:10.1016/s0167-7012(00)00122-6 · Cited by 2,550
STEPANOVIĆ, S., VUKOVIĆ, D., HOLA, V., BONAVENTURA, G. D., DJUKIĆ, S., ĆIRKOVIĆ, I., & RUZICKA, F. (2007) · APMIS · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0463.2007.apm_630.x · Cited by 2,494
Cited by
Marine Plastic Debris: A New Surface for Microbial Colonization
Wright, R. J., Erni-Cassola, G., Zadjelovic, V., Latva, M., & Christie-Oleza, J. A. (2020) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.0c02305 · Cited by 513
Microbial Biofilms in the Food Industry—A Comprehensive Review
Carrascosa, C., Raheem, D., Ramos, F., Saraiva, A., & Raposo, A. (2021) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph18042014 · Cited by 459
Propidium iodide staining underestimates viability of adherent bacterial cells
Rosenberg, M., Azevedo, N. F., & Ivask, A. (2019) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-019-42906-3 · Cited by 447
Self-citationPathogenesis of Proteus mirabilis Infection
Armbruster, C. E., Mobley, H. L. T., & Pearson, M. M. (2018) · EcoSal Plus · doi:10.1128/ecosalplus.esp-0009-2017 · Cited by 409
Haney, E., Trimble, M., Cheng, J., Vallé, Q., & Hancock, R. (2018) · Biomolecules · doi:10.3390/biom8020029 · Cited by 308
Metadata
- Authors
- Azeredo, J., Azevedo, N. F., Briandet, R., Cerca, N., Coenye, T., Costa, A. R., Desvaux, M., Di Bonaventura, G., Hébraud, M., Jaglic, Z., Kačániová, M., Knøchel, S., Lourenço, A., Mergulhão, F., Meyer, R. L., Nychas, G., Simões, M., Tresse, O., & Sternberg, C.
- Venue
- Critical Reviews in Microbiology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2016-11-21
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 313-351
- ISSN
- 1040-841X (ISSN-L)
- 1549-7828
- OpenAlex
- W2553095014
- Cited by
- 1,045
- References
- 294
- FWCI
- 29.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Critical review on biofilm methods. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/1040841x.2016.1208146
- The paper
- Azeredo, J., Azevedo, N. F., Briandet, R., Cerca, N., Coenye, T., Costa, A. R., Desvaux, M., Di Bonaventura, G., Hébraud, M., Jaglic, Z., Kačániová, M., Knøchel, S., Lourenço, A., Mergulhão, F., Meyer, R. L., Nychas, G., Simões, M., Tresse, O., & Sternberg, C. (2017). Critical review on biofilm methods. Critical Reviews in Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1080/1040841x.2016.1208146
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.
