The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Bacterial Adhesion at Synthetic Surfaces
Open accessAbstract
A systematic investigation into the effect of surface chemistry on bacterial adhesion was carried out. In particular, a number of physicochemical factors important in defining the surface at the molecular level were assessed for their effect on the adhesion of Listeria monocytogenes , Salmonella typhimurium , Staphylococcus aureus , and Escherichia coli . The primary experiments involved the grafting of groups varying in hydrophilicity, hydrophobicity, chain length, and chemical functionality onto glass substrates such that the surfaces were homogeneous and densely packed with functional groups. All of the surfaces were found to be chemically well defined, and their measured surface energies varied from 15 to 41 mJ · m −2 . Protein adsorption experiments were performed with 3 H-labelled bovine serum albumin and cytochrome c prior to bacterial attachment studies. Hydrophilic uncharged surfaces showed the greatest resistance to protein adsorption; however, our studies also showed that the effectiveness of poly(ethyleneoxide) (PEO) polymers was not simply a result of its hydrophilicity and molecular weight alone. The adsorption of the two proteins approximately correlated with short-term cell adhesion, and bacterial attachment for L. monocytogenes and E. coli also correlated with the chemistry of the underlying substrate. However, for S. aureus and S. typhimurium a different pattern of attachment occurred, suggesting a dissimilar mechanism of cell attachment, although high-molecular-weight PEO was still the least-cell-adsorbing surface. The implications of this for in vivo attachment of cells suggest that hydrophilic passivating groups may be the best method for preventing cell adsorption to synthetic substrates provided they can be grafted uniformly and in sufficient density at the surface.
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
Cited by
Banerjee, I., Pangule, R. C., & Kane, R. S. (2011) · Advanced Materials · doi:10.1002/adma.201001215 · Cited by 2,749
Microbial degradation and deterioration of polyethylene - a review
Restrepo-Flórez, J.-M., Bassi, A., & Thompson, M. R. (2014) · International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation · doi:10.1016/j.ibiod.2013.12.014 · Cited by 778
Microbial degradation of low density polyethylene (LDPE): a review
Kumar Sen, S., & Raut, S. (2015) · Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.jece.2015.01.003 · Cited by 456
Polymeric Thin Films That Resist the Adsorption of Proteins and the Adhesion of Bacteria
Chapman, R. G., Ostuni, E., Liang, M. N., Meluleni, G., Kim, E., Yan, L., Pier, G., Warren, H. S., & Whitesides, G. M. (2001) · Langmuir · doi:10.1021/la001222d · Cited by 356
Permanently microbicidal materials coatings
Klibanov, A. M. (2007) · Journal of Materials Chemistry · doi:10.1039/b702079a · Cited by 326
Metadata
- Authors
- Cunliffe, D., Smart, C. A., Alexander, C., & Vulfson, E. N.
- Venue
- Applied and Environmental Microbiology
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 1999-11
- Volume
- 65
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 4995-5002
- ISSN
- 0099-2240 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-5336
- OpenAlex
- W2130731188
- Cited by
- 282
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Bacterial Adhesion at Synthetic Surfaces. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aem.65.11.4995-5002.1999
- The paper
- Cunliffe, D., Smart, C. A., Alexander, C., & Vulfson, E. N. (1999). Bacterial Adhesion at Synthetic Surfaces. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.65.11.4995-5002.1999
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.