Cited by 48Oral microbiology and periodontitis researchBacterial biofilms and quorum sensingDental Research and COVID-19

Microbial dynamics during conversion from supragingival to subgingival biofilms in an in vitro model

Open access
Thurnheer, T., Bostanci, N., Belibasakis, G.N.·2016·Molecular Oral Microbiology

Abstract

Summary: The development of dental caries and periodontal diseases result from distinct shifts in the microbiota of the tooth‐associated biofilm. This in vitro study aimed to investigate changes in biofilm composition and structure, during the shift from a ‘supragingival’ aerobic profile to a ‘subgingival’ anaerobic profile. Biofilms consisting of Actinomyces oris, Candida albicans, Fusobacterium nucleatum, Streptococcus oralis, Streptococcus mutans and Veillonella dispar were aerobically grown in saliva‐containing medium on hydroxyapatite disks. After 64 h, Campylobacter rectus, Prevotella intermedia and Streptococcus anginosus were further added along with human serum, while culture conditions were shifted to microaerophilic. After 96 h, Porphyromonas gingivalis, Tannerella forsythia and Treponema denticola were finally added and the biofilm was grown anaerobically for another 64 h. At the end of each phase, biofilms were harvested for species‐specific quantification and localization. Apart from C. albicans, all other species gradually increased during aerobic and microaerophilic conditions, but remained steady during anaerobic conditions. Biofilm thickness was doubled during the microaerophilic phase, but remained steady throughout the anaerobic phase. Extracellular polysaccharide presence was gradually reduced throughout the growth period. Biofilm viability was reduced during the microaerophilic conversion, but was recovered during the anaerobic phase. This in vitro study has characterized the dynamic structural shifts occurring in an oral biofilm model during the switch from aerobic to anaerobic conditions, potentially modeling the conversion of supragingival to subgingival biofilms. Within the limitations of this experimental model, the findings may provide novel insights into the ecology of oral biofilms.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/omi.12108

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • At the end of the microaerophilic phase, at which point primary and secondary colonizers had been introduced, biofilm thickness doubled relative to the biofilm thickness at the end of the aerobic phase in which only primary colonizers were present in the system.

    “At the end of the microaerophilic phase, at which point primary and secondary colonizers had been introduced, biofilm thickness doubled relative to the biofilm thickness at the end of the aerobic phase in which only primary colonizers were present in the system.”
  • Biofilm viability increased during the transition to the anaerobic phase.

    “Moreover, biofilm viability increased during the transition to the anaerobic phase.”
  • A novel role for aerobic exopolysaccharide synthesis in subgingival biofilm formation was identified, in which treatment with dextranase reduced bacterial numbers in subgingival communities, thus highlighting the importance of supragingival biofilms in the formation of subgingival biofilm.

    “Interestingly, a novel role for aerobic exopolysaccharide synthesis in subgingival biofilm formation was identified, in which treatment with dextranase reduced bacterial numbers in subgingival communities,64 thus highlighting the importance of supragingival biofilms in the formation of subgingival biofilm.64”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Thurnheer, T., Bostanci, N., & Belibasakis, G. N.
Affiliations
  • University of Zurich (CH)
  • Oral Microbiology and Immunology Institute of Oral Biology Center of Dental Medicine University of Zürich Zürich Switzerland
Corresponding author
Thurnheer, T.
Venue
Molecular Oral Microbiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-07-02
Volume
31
Issue
2
Pages
125-135
ISSN
  • 2041-1006 (ISSN-L)
  • 2041-1014
OpenAlex
W1486437305
Cited by
48
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 2
FWCI
5.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Molecular Oral Microbiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Oral microbiology and periodontitis research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bacterial biofilms and quorum sensing
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › General Dentistry › Dental Research and COVID-19
Keywords
supragingival plaque, subgingival plaque, dental plaque, microbial community dynamics, microaerophilic conditions, biofilm thickness, exopolysaccharides, biofilm viability, Porphyromonas gingivalis, Treponema denticola, Tannerella forsythia, Streptococcus mutans, Fusobacterium nucleatum, Veillonella dispar, Candida albicans, periodontal disease, dental caries
MeSH terms
Bacteria, Aerobic, Bacteria, Anaerobic, Gingiva, Gingival Diseases, Humans, Biofilms, Microbial Consortia, In Vitro Techniques

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