Cited by 96

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Effects of Glucose and Fluoride on Competition and Metabolism within in vitro Dental Bacterial Communities and Biofilms

Bradshaw, D.J., Marsh, P.D., Hodgson, R.J., Visser, J.M.·2002·Caries Research

Abstract

Antimicrobial effects of fluoride in vivo remain contentious. Previous studies suggested that 1 m M NaF reduced acid production from glucose, and prevented the enrichment of bacteria associated with caries in a chemostat model. The present study examines the effects of a lower fluoride concentration (0.53 m M, 10 ppm NaF) in both biofilm and planktonic microbial communities. Nine oral species were grown at pH 7.0 and pulsed on 10 successive days with glucose; bacterial metabolism was allowed to reduce the pH for 6 h before being returned to neutrality, either in the presence or absence of NaF. In addition, 10-day-old mixed culture biofilms were overlaid with glucose, with or without NaF, and the pH change followed by microelectrode. After 10 days, chemostat pH dropped to ca. pH 4.5 following glucose pulses, and the community was dominated by Streptococcus mutans (rising from 4 to 23% of total CFU) and Veillonella dispar (16 to 73%). In comparison, after 10 days pulsing with glucose + fluoride, the final pH was significantly higher (ca. pH 4.9) (paired t test, p < 0.0001). The culture was predominated by V. dispar (70%) and Actinomyces naeslundii (13%), whereas S. mutans proportions were significantly lower (t test, p = 0.04), remaining <3% of the total flora, compared to the culture without fluoride. Biofilm pH fell to only pH 5.55 1 h after glucose/fluoride overlay, compared to 4.55 with glucose alone (paired t test, p < 0.000001). Analysis of the data suggests that fluoride exerts dual antimicrobial modes of action. Fluoride prevents enrichment of S. mutans by inhibiting critical metabolic processes (direct effect) and, in an inter-related way, by reducing environmental acidification (indirect effect) in biofilms.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1159/000057864

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. 10.1159/000016487 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.1146/annurev.micro.49.1.711 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Bradshaw, D. J., Marsh, P. D., Hodgson, R. J., & Visser, J. M.
Venue
Caries Research
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2002
Volume
36
Issue
2
Pages
81-86
ISSN
  • 0008-6568
  • 1421-976X
Cited by
96
References
0
Language
en

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