INFLUENCE OF ANTIMICROBIAL PHOTOINACTIVATION ON MONOCULTURAL BACTERIAL BIOFILMS

Laura Jurkaitytė1, Ieva Dumšytė1, Alisa Gricajeva1, Lukas Stasiulionis1, Lilija Kalėdienė1

1 Department of Microbiology and Biotechnology, Life Sciences Center, Institute of Biosciences, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania

[email protected]

Most of the bacteria are naturally found living in sessile coordinated functional communities called biofilms. Microbial biofilms are widespread in the environment and form on biotic and abiotic surfaces if constant moisture is present. Adhesion of biofilms to different surfaces is promoted by the extracellular matrix that bacteria are self-embedded in [1]. Compared to floating or planktonic cells, one of the benefits of living in biofilms is the substantially higher resistance to adverse external physical and chemical impact [2].

Biofilms play an important role in human infections and can pose a potential threat to material integrity in confined facilities such as hospitals, food, and other industrial settings. Thus, nowadays, facing the enormously fast development of bacterial resistance to different conventional antimicrobial agents there is a need in a discovery and analysis of new, natural bacterial control methods that would be safe and effective to use, especially against recalcitrant bacterial biofilms [3].

Therefore, this study aimed to investigate a photosensitization-based method known as antimicrobial photoinactivation (API) [4] against monocultural biofilms, as well as planktonic cells (to investigate prevention of biofilm formation) of Pseudomonas aeruginosa atcc 27853, Staphylococcus saprophyticus AG1 and Staphylococcus epidermidis atcc 12228 (only planktonic cells evaluated). For the API, natural photosensitizers (PS) such as riboflavin (RF) and chlorophyllin (Chl) in combination with appropriate photosensitizing visible-light irradiations were used. It was found that RF- and Chl-base API can have bacteriocidic effect against biofilms of the selected bacteria. However, considering actual application of the technology, concentration of selected natural PSs, irradiation doses and other optimization studies should be further performed.

Figure 1
Fig. 1. Simplified scheme of the API method used in this work (A); results of RF- and Chl-based API exemplified by S. saprophyticus AG1 (B). A horizontal dashed line in the graphs denotes minimal 3 log reduction (indicating bactericidal effect).

[1] M. Berlanga, R. Guerrero, Living together in biofilms: the microbial cell factory and its biotechnological implications, Microbial Cell Factories 15, 165 (2016).

[2] H. C. Flemming, J. Wingender, U. Szewzyk et al., Biofilms: an emergent form of bacterial life, Nature Reviews Microbiology 14, 563-575 (2016).

[3] H. Koo, R. N. Allan, R. P. Howlin et al., Targeting microbial biofilms: current and prospective therapeutic strategies, Nature Reviews Microbiology 15, 740-755 (2017).

[4] I. Buchovec, A. Gricajeva, L. Kalėdienė, P. Vitta, Antimicrobial photoinactivation approach based on natural agents for control of bacteria biofilms in spacecraft, International Journal of Molecular Sciences 21, 6932 (2020).