The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Synergistic Interactions of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus in an In Vitro Wound Model
Open accessAbstract
In individuals with polymicrobial infections, microbes often display synergistic interactions that can enhance their colonization, virulence, or persistence. One of the most prevalent types of polymicrobial infection occurs in chronic wounds, where Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus are the two most common causes. Although they are the most commonly associated microbial species in wound infections, very little is known about their interspecies relationship. Evidence suggests that P. aeruginosa – S. aureus coinfections are more virulent than monoculture infection with either species; however, difficulties in growing these two pathogens together in vitro have hampered attempts to uncover the mechanisms involved. Here we describe a simple and clinically relevant in vitro wound model that supported concomitant growth of P. aeruginosa and S. aureus . We observed that the ability of P. aeruginosa and S. aureus to survive antibiotic treatment increased when they were grown together in planktonic cocultures and that antibiotic tolerance was further enhanced when they were grown together in the wound model. We attributed this enhanced tolerance to both the “host-derived” and “bacterium-derived” matrix components. Taken together, our data indicate that P. aeruginosa and S. aureus may benefit each other by coinfecting wounds and that the host-derived matrix may serve as important a role as the bacterium-derived matrix in protecting bacteria from some antibiotics.
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
Pastar, I., Nusbaum, A. G., Gil, J., Patel, S. B., Chen, J., Valdes, J., Stojadinovic, O., Plano, L. R., Tomic-Canic, M., & Davis, S. C. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0056846 · Cited by 391
An in vivo polymicrobial biofilm wound infection model to study interspecies interactions
Dalton, T., Dowd, S. E., Wolcott, R. D., Sun, Y., Watters, C., Griswold, J. A., & Rumbaugh, K. P. (2011) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0027317 · Cited by 372
Self-citation
Cited by
Bacterial quorum sensing in complex and dynamically changing environments
Mukherjee, S., & Bassler, B. L. (2019) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/s41579-019-0186-5 · Cited by 1,374
Li, H., Li, B., Lv, D., Li, W., Lu, Y., & Luo, G. (2023) · Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.addr.2023.114778 · Cited by 142
Iron depletion enhances production of antimicrobials by Pseudomonas aeruginosa
Nguyen, A. T., Jones, J. W., Ruge, M. A., Kane, M. A., & Oglesby-Sherrouse, A. G. (2015) · Journal of Bacteriology · doi:10.1128/jb.00072-15 · Cited by 88
Metadata
- Authors
- DeLeon, S., Clinton, A., Fowler, H., Everett, J., Horswill, A. R., & Rumbaugh, K. P.
- Venue
- Infection and Immunity
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 2014-11
- Volume
- 82
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 4718-4728
- ISSN
- 0019-9567 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-5522
- OpenAlex
- W2098455529
- Cited by
- 418
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 5.35
- 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: Synergistic Interactions of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus in an In Vitro Wound Model. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/iai.02198-14
- The paper
- DeLeon, S., Clinton, A., Fowler, H., Everett, J., Horswill, A. R., & Rumbaugh, K. P. (2014). Synergistic Interactions of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus in an In Vitro Wound Model. Infection and Immunity. https://doi.org/10.1128/iai.02198-14
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.