Cited by 328Oral microbiology and periodontitis researchSalivary Gland Disorders and FunctionsBacterial biofilms and quorum sensing

Saliva-Bacterium Interactions in Oral Microbial Ecology

Scannapieco, Frank A.·1994·Critical Reviews in Oral Biology & Medicine

Abstract

Saliva is thought to have a significant impact on the colonization of microorganisms in the oral cavity. Salivary components may participate in this process by one of four general mechanisms: binding to microorganisms to facilitate their clearance from the oral cavity, serving as receptors in oral pellicles for microbial adhesion to host surfaces, inhibiting microbial growth or mediating microbial killing, and serving as microbial nutritional substrates. This article reviews information pertinent to the molecular interaction of salivary components with bacteria (primarily the oral streptococci and Actinomyces) and explores the implications of these interactions for oral bacterial colonization and dental plaque formation. Knowledge of the molecular mechanisms controlling bacterial colonization of the oral cavity may suggest methods to prevent not only dental plaque formation but also serious medical infections that may follow microbial colonization of the oral cavity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/10454411940050030201

Cites

Statistics

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

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?

  • Coaggregation may reduce the abundance of bacteria in physiological fluids such as saliva because aggregated bacteria are cleared more easily than planktonic cells.

    “Coaggregation may reduce the abundance of bacteria in physiological fluids, such as saliva, as aggregated bacteria are cleared more easily than planktonic cells.”

    From Coaggregation of oral pathogens by postbiotic lactobacilli (2025) · cites this paper as [6]

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 378 · Cited by 328

Authors
Scannapieco, F. A.
Affiliations
University at Buffalo, State University of New York (US)
Corresponding author
Scannapieco, Frank A.
Venue
Critical Reviews in Oral Biology & Medicine
Published
1994-09
Volume
5
Issue
3
Pages
203-248
ISSN
  • 1045-4411 (ISSN-L)
  • 1544-1113
OpenAlex
W1955252499
Cited by
328
References
378
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 17
FWCI
1.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Critical Reviews in Oral Biology & Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (DE 09838)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Oral microbiology and periodontitis research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Salivary Gland Disorders and Functions
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bacterial biofilms and quorum sensing
Keywords
oral colonization, dental plaque, oral streptococci, Actinomyces, bacterial adhesion, salivary components, bacterial growth inhibition
MeSH terms
Actinomyces, Bacterial Adhesion, Dental Deposits, Dental Plaque, Ecology, Humans, Saliva, Salivary Proteins and Peptides, Streptococcus, Bacterial Physiological Phenomena

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