Cited by 49

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cross-Kingdom Cell-to-Cell Interactions in Cariogenic Biofilm Initiation

Wan, S.X., Tian, J., Liu, Y., Dhall, A., Koo, H., Hwang, G.·2021·Journal of Dental Research

Abstract

Candida albicans is known to form polymicrobial biofilms with various Streptococcus spp., including mitis and mutans group streptococci. Streptococcus gordonii (mitis group) has been shown to bind avidly to C. albicans hyphae via direct cell-to-cell interaction, while the cariogenic pathogen Streptococcus mutans (mutans group) interacts with the fungal cells via extracellular glucans. However, the biophysical properties of these cross-kingdom interactions at the single-cell level during the early stage of biofilm formation remain understudied. Here, we examined the binding forces between S. mutans (or S. gordonii) and C. albicans in the presence and absence of in situ glucans on the fungal surface using single-cell atomic force microscopy and their influence on biofilm initiation and subsequent development under cariogenic conditions. The data show that S. gordonii binding force to the C. albicans surface is significantly higher than that of S. mutans to the fungal surface (~2-fold). However, S. mutans binding forces are dramatically enhanced when the C. albicans cell surface is locally coated with extracellular glucans (~6-fold vs. uncoated C. albicans), which vastly exceeds the forces between S. gordonii and C. albicans. The enhanced binding affinity of S. mutans to glucan-coated C. albicans resulted in a larger structure during early biofilm initiation compared to S. gordonii–C. albicans biofilms. Ultimately, this resulted in S. mutans dominance composition in the 3-species biofilm model under cariogenic conditions. This study provides a novel biophysical aspect of Candida-streptococcal interaction whereby extracellular glucans may selectively favor S. mutans binding interactions with C. albicans during cariogenic 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 · 10.1177/0022034520950286

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • Under sugar exposure, cariogenic species reduce the biological diversity of the dental biofilm and outcompete oral eubiota like S. gordonii, S. sanguinis, and S. oralis.

    “Under sugar exposure, these cariogenic species reduce the biological diversity of the dental biofilm and outcompete oral eubiota like the oral commensal streptococci Streptococcus gordonii, Streptococcus sanguinis, and Streptococcus oralis (8).”

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 28

  1. 10.1128/microbiolspec.GPP3-0042-2018 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.1099/mic.0.083378-0 · DOI
  3. 10.1128/IAI.00438-09 · DOI · Paper page
  4. 10.1177/154411130301400203 · DOI · Paper page
  5. 10.1128/mBio.01363-14 · DOI
  6. 10.1016/j.tim.2015.01.011 · DOI
  7. 10.1128/IAI.00087-14 · DOI
  8. 10.1038/nprot.2009.65 · DOI
  9. 10.1128/AEM.05203-11 · DOI
  10. 10.1242/jcs.030999 · DOI
  11. 10.1159/000479091 · DOI
  12. 10.1063/1.1143970 · DOI
  13. 10.1177/0022034515592859 · DOI
  14. 10.1038/s41396-018-0113-1 · DOI
  15. 10.1371/journal.ppat.1007342 · DOI
  16. 10.2217/fmb.14.92 · DOI
  17. 10.1128/JB.00276-08 · DOI
  18. 10.3389/fmicb.2016.00686 · DOI
  19. 10.1038/nchembio.181 · DOI
  20. O’Donnell LE, 2015, FEMS Yeast Res, 15
  21. 10.1039/c2sm25100k · DOI
  22. 10.1038/s41467-020-15165-4 · DOI
  23. 10.1099/mic.0.062109-0 · DOI
  24. 10.3402/jom.v6.23419. · DOI
  25. 10.1128/IAI.00685-10 · DOI · Paper page
  26. 10.1038/s41396-020-0608-4 · DOI
  27. 10.1111/omi.12049 · DOI
  28. 10.1371/journal.pone.0151908 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Wan, S. X., Tian, J., Liu, Y., Dhall, A., Koo, H., & Hwang, G.
Affiliations
  • Biofilm Research Labs, Levy Center for Oral Health, Department of Orthodontics, Divisions of Pediatric Dentistry and Community Oral Health, School of Dental Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
  • Department of Preventive and Restorative Sciences, School of Dental Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
Venue
Journal of Dental Research
Published
2020-08-27
Volume
100
Issue
1
Pages
74-81
ISSN
  • 0022-0345
  • 1544-0591
Cited by
49
References
7
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