Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 349

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Association between Methicillin Susceptibility and Biofilm Regulation in Staphylococcus aureus Isolates from Device-Related Infections

Open access
O'Neill, Eoghan, Pozzi, Clarissa, Houston, Patrick, Smyth, Davida, Humphreys, Hilary, Robinson, D. Ashley, O'Gara, James P.·2007·Journal of Clinical Microbiology

Abstract

Production of icaADBC -encoded polysaccharide intercellular adhesin, or poly- N -acetylglucosamine (PIA/PNAG), represents an important biofilm mechanism in staphylococci. We previously described a glucose-induced, ica -independent biofilm mechanism in four methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) isolates. Here, biofilm regulation by NaCl and glucose was characterized in 114 MRSA and 98 methicillin-sensitive S. aureus (MSSA) isolates from diagnosed device-related infections. NaCl-induced biofilm development was significantly more prevalent among MSSA than MRSA isolates, and this association was independent of the isolate's genetic background as assessed by spa sequence typing. Among MSSA isolates, PIA/PNAG production correlated with biofilm development in NaCl, whereas in MRSA isolates grown in NaCl or glucose, PIA/PNAG production was not detected even though icaADBC was transcribed and regulated. Glucose-induced biofilm in MRSA was ica independent and apparently mediated by a protein adhesin(s). Experiments performed with strains that were amenable to genetic manipulation revealed that deletion of icaADBC had no effect on biofilm in a further six MRSA isolates but abolished biofilm in four MSSA isolates. Mutation of sarA abolished biofilm in seven MRSA and eight MSSA isolates. In contrast, mutation of agr in 13 MRSA and 8 MSSA isolates substantially increased biofilm (more than twofold) in only 5 of 21 (23%) isolates and had no significant impact on biofilm in the remaining 16 isolates. We conclude that biofilm development in MRSA is ica independent and involves a protein adhesin(s) regulated by SarA and Agr, whereas SarA-regulated PIA/PNAG plays a more important role in MSSA biofilm development.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1128/jcm.02280-06

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

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

See all 349

Metadata

Authors
O'Neill, E., Pozzi, C., Houston, P., Smyth, D., Humphreys, H., Robinson, D. A., & O'Gara, J. P.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
Published
2007-05
Volume
45
Issue
5
Pages
1379-1388
ISSN
  • 0095-1137 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-660X
OpenAlex
W2098785211
Cited by
349
References
0
FWCI
8.03
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: Association between Methicillin Susceptibility and Biofilm Regulation in Staphylococcus aureus Isolates from Device-Related Infections. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/jcm.02280-06
The paper
O'Neill, E., Pozzi, C., Houston, P., Smyth, D., Humphreys, H., Robinson, D. A., & O'Gara, J. P. (2007). Association between Methicillin Susceptibility and Biofilm Regulation in Staphylococcus aureus Isolates from Device-Related Infections. Journal of Clinical Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.02280-06

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.