Next Article in Journal
Winning the War against Multi-Drug Resistant Diarrhoeagenic Bacteria
Next Article in Special Issue
Inhibition and Interactions of Campylobacter jejuni from Broiler Chicken Houses with Organic Acids
Previous Article in Journal
Dynamic Gene Network Analysis of Caco-2 Cell Response to Shiga Toxin-Producing Escherichia coli-Associated Hemolytic–Uremic Syndrome
Previous Article in Special Issue
Improved Positive Predictive Performance of Listeria Indicator Broth: A Sensitive Environmental Screening Test to Identify Presumptively Positive Swab Samples
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Communication

Short Communication: Preliminary Differences Identified in Genes Responsible for Biofilm Formation in Poultry Isolates of Salmonella enterica Heidelberg, Enteritidis, and Kentucky

1
Center for Food Safety and Food Science Department, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72704, USA
2
Southern Plains Agricultural Research Center, United States Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Unit, College Station, TX 77845, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Submission received: 12 June 2019 / Revised: 24 June 2019 / Accepted: 29 June 2019 / Published: 9 July 2019

Abstract

:
Salmonella enterica is one of the most prevalent foodborne pathogens. The large quantity of serovar types results in the colonization of a large spectrum of hosts, with different environmental conditions and hazards. The aim of this study was to evaluate the differences in gene expression (bcsA and csgD) of Salmonella enterica serovars Heidelberg, Kentucky, and Enteritidis during biofilm formation using quantitative reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR). Overall, there appeared to be differences in expression between the different serovars with high variation between strains. These data are important as they demonstrate considerable variability in gene expression between serovars and strains of poultry isolates of Salmonella enterica.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Non-typhoidal Salmonella enterica is one of the most commonly encountered bacterial foodborne pathogens, with over 2500 serovars currently documented with several associated with produce, meat, and poultry products [1,2,3,4,5,6]. Salmonella serovars Enteritidis, Heidelberg, and Kentucky are among the five most identified serovars from poultry and poultry products [2,4,5,7,8]. Salmonella Enteritidis is considered the most frequently associated with the consumption of undercooked poultry and egg products [9,10]. Salmonella Heidelberg is also associated with eggs. However, it is more typically identified with outbreaks of contaminated poultry meat [11,12,13,14]. While Salmonella Kentucky is commonly found, it is uncommonly associated with foodborne disease [7]. Therefore, it is important to investigate the differences between host-adapted serovars that exhibit an altered disease potential in different hosts, such as Salmonella Enteritidis, versus host-restricted serovars that cause significant pathology in closely related host species [15,16,17,18]. While Salmonella Kentucky is a rare foodborne disease, the ability to survive in the environment and persist is intriguing.
Outside of the host, Salmonella expresses a variety of survival mechanisms to the environment, one of which is the ability to form biofilms. Biofilms enable Salmonella to resist antimicrobials and thrive in a variety of habitats [19]. Biofilms may form on biotic surfaces, such as on organic plant structures, or abiotic surfaces, such as stainless steel and plastic. Biofilms can also form what is termed a pellicle at the air-liquid interface [20]. Because of this ability, Salmonella can colonize a food processing area and form a biofilm. Any Salmonella strains allowed to persist may form stronger biofilms in the future and become more resistant to removal than freshly introduced strains [21]. This process is enhanced with the development of the biopolymer matrix of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) within the pellicle.
Comprising up to 90% of the total matter of a biofilm, EPS plays a pivotal role in functions related to structural support, nutrient transport, and protection [22]. In Salmonella, the principle polysaccharide structural component of the EPS matrices is cellulose, chiefly regulated by the bcs (bacterial cellulose synthase) operon, without which, Salmonella is unable to form strong biofilms [23]. The other major component of the matrix is the amyloid proteinaceous curli fimbriae structures controlled by the csg operons (curli specific gene) which interact with cellulose to start the formation of biofilms and enhance the sequential survival [24,25]. These two structural components provide the majority of the EPS for Salmonella and are critical in the ability to form a biofilm.
The objective of the current study was to examine the differences in the expression of critical Salmonella biofilm structural genes across several serovars. Salmonella Enteritidis and Heidelberg are important foodborne pathogens, whereas Kentucky is pervasive yet mostly benign and serves as an interesting juxtaposition. Expression levels of the bcsA and csgD genes were observed in strains of Salmonella serovars Enteritidis, Heidelberg, and Kentucky over the course of the development of bacterial pellicles across a 96-h time period. The authors hypothesized that the different serovars would exhibit contrasting expression levels of the two genes as assessed using quantitative reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction assays (qRT-PCR).

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Bacterial Strains and Pellicle Formation

Three serovars of Salmonella consisting of three unique strains from the University of Arkansas Center for Food Safety Culture Collection were used in this study. This included three strains of S. Kentucky (UA CFS# 38-0055, 38-0084, 38-0085), three strains of S. Enteritidis (UA CFS# 38-0086, 38-0087, 38-0088), and three strains of S. Heidelberg (UA CFS# 38-00126, 38-00127, 38-00128). Quadrant streaks of the isolates from frozen stocks were prepared on Luria–Bertani (LB) (BD Biosciences, Franklin Lakes, NJ, USA) agar plates and incubated for 24 h at 37 °C. After incubation, single colonies were selected and grown in 5 mL of LB broth overnight in a 37 °C shaking incubator for 18 h. Overnight cultures of each of the Salmonella strains were diluted 1:10 and inoculated into 125 mL flasks containing 50 mL of LB broth without salt (10 g tryptone and 5 g yeast extract per L) (BD Biosciences, Franklin Lakes, NJ, USA). Flasks were placed at room temperature for 96 h with the planktonic cultures developing pellicles by the end of this period. At the 0 h, 24 h, 48 h, 72 h, and 96 h time points, 1 mL of culture was collected directly below the meniscus and total RNA was extracted using a Qiagen RNeasy kit (Qiagen, Valencia, CA, USA). RNA was stored at −80 °C until qRT-PCR was performed. Two independent trials were performed for this study.

2.2. Quantitative Reverse-Transcriptase PCR (qRT-PCR) Assay

The qRT-PCR assays were performed using the Verso 1-Step RT-qPCR Kit (Thermo Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) and optimized using an Eppendorf RealPlexTM Mastercycler Epigradient Thermocycler (Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany). To remove any DNA remaining after RNA extraction, the RNA samples were treated with DNase I (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA, USA) before each assay. Primer pairs for the csgD, bcsA, and the rRNA housekeeping gene rsmC were synthesized by Integrated DNA Technologies (IDT, Coralville, IA, USA) and confirmed using the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) BLAST. Primer sets yielded amplicons that were 156, 136, and 190 bp for the putative bcsA, csgD, and rsmC genes. A mastermix was prepared to ensure that each 25 µL reaction contained the following: 12.5 µL of 2× 1-Step qPCR SYBR Mix (Thermo Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA), 1.25 µL RT Enhancer, 0.25 µL Verso Enzyme mix, 500 nM of each forward and reverse primer, 100 ng of total RNA template, and nuclease-free water (MBI Growcells, Irving, CA, USA). The qRT-PCR conditions consisted of a 5-minute cDNA synthesis step 50 °C step followed by a 15 m Hot Start at 95 °C. Then, 40 cycles consisting of 15 s for denaturation at 95 °C, 15 s for primer annealing at 55 °C, and 20 s for amplicon extension at 68 °C was performed with melt curves. The melt curves were produced by cycling form of 95 °C for 15 s and then by 60 °C for 20 m with a 0.5 °C increase in temperature per minute until a final temperature of 95 °C was reached. Each assay was performed in triplicate.

2.3. Statistical Analysis

In order to study the differences in gene expression among the three Salmonella serovars, we observed the RNA transcript levels of the pellicle structural genes csgD and bcsA as determined by qRT-PCR. The CT value was taken from 40, which is the maximum number of cycles, to give the relative abundance of CT (nCT). Therefore, an increase in CT means there is an increase in gene expression, a decrease in CT means there is a decrease in gene expression. The differences in CT values were compared with values exhibited by the rRNA housekeeping gene rsmC and analyzed using the JMP® 14.0 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA) software suite. Data were analyzed using n-way ANOVA. Means were separated using Tukey’s protected HSD with a significance level of p ≤ 0.05. The SEM, or standard error of measurement, was included as it represents the variation of the data across the average.

3. Results

3.1. CsgD Expression

First, the main effect of time was evaluated in order to determine if changes in gene expression were temporal. The temporal variation of csgD expression throughout the study was demonstrated, with the peak of gene expression at day 3. (p < 0.0001, Figure 1, Table 1). The main effect of serovar was significant, with S. Kentucky and Heidelberg exhibiting lower levels of gene expression than S. Enteritidis (p < 0.0001, Figure 2). The gene expression for day 4 was the most divergent (p < 0.05, Table 2).
In order to determine if the changes in gene expression between serovars were driven by specific strains, poultry isolates of Salmonella Heidelberg, (38-0055, 38-0084, 38-0085), Enteritidis (38-0086, 38-0087, 38-0088) and Kentucky (38-0126, 38-0127, 38-0128) over time were evaluated. The interaction between strain and serovar was statistically significant, with a demonstrated variation between strains within serovar (Table 2). Salmonella Kentucky 38-0085 showed the lowest level of gene expression on day 4 compared to 38-0055 and 38-0084 (Table 2). Two of the three strains increased their gene expression on day 1, with all strains decreasing gene expression relative to day 3 on day 4. Additionally, S. Kentucky strain 38-0084 exhibited a higher magnitude of gene expression changes throughout the study as compared to other strains (Table 2). S. Heidelberg expressed less variation, with day 2 relative to day 1 and day 4 relative to day 1 exhibiting the same direction of variation, though the magnitude was different. Finally, S. Enteritidis demonstrated the highest level of gene expression and the most dramatic variation in the interaction between strain and time (Table 2). Therefore, there are significant interactions in the differences in csgD expression between the serovars, as well as the strains independently, across time. Temporal expression of csgD was polynomial, with gene expression increasing from day 0 to day 1, dropping by day 3, and then increasing by day 4 (Figure 3).

3.2. BcsA Expression

In order to evaluate the differences in the overall gene expression across time irrespective of serovar, the main effect of time for bcsA expression was evaluated. The overall trend of the expression was statistically significant and was highly variable. Overall expression levels of bcsA showed polynomial trends in temporal expression, with gene expression increasing from day 0 to day 1, followed by a decrease on day 2 and day 3, and then increase again on day 4 (p < 0.0001, Table 3, Figure 4). The greatest difference in gene expression differences of bcsA was between day 0 and day 4, with a 2.89-fold change reduction in gene expression to day 0 (Table 2). When comparing the main effect of serovars, S. Enteritidis and S. Kentucky demonstrated the highest gene expression overall (p = 0.0019, Figure 5).
The interaction between strain and time was also significant, though it was not as dynamic as the gene expression differences of csgD (p < 0.05, Table 4). S. Kentucky strain 38-0084 showed the greatest gene expression difference between day 2 and day 3 as compared to the other serovars (p = 0.0152, Figure 6c). Additionally, S. Kentucky strain 38-0085 demonstrating the lowest gene expression on day 4 as compared to the other strains (p = 0.0152, Figure 6c). Unlike the two other serovars, S. Enteritidis strains were more or less volatile in their expression as compared to the other serovars. There was some variation on gene expression on day 4, with strain 38-087 and 38-088 bcsA expression being the most divergent from 38-086 (p < 0.0001, Figure 6a). S. Heidelberg was slightly more dynamic than the other two serovars (p = 0.0222, Figure 6b). On day 1, 38-0127 and 38-1026 expressed more bcsA as compared to 38-1028 (Figure 6b). Strain 38-1026 had higher levels of gene expression as compared to the other strains on day 3 (Figure 6b). Finally, day 4 bcsA expression was the lowest in 38-0127. Therefore, while the strains were not as volatile in their gene expression of bcsA and csgD, differences between strain and serovar existed.

3.3. Ratio of csgD to bcsA Expression

In order to compare the differences in gene expression magnitude between csgD versus bcsA, the ratio of the nCTs were taken. It should be noted that an upregulation of csgD initiates the bcsA operon. If their ratio was similar across all serovars and time, then mechanistically it is theorized that the transcriptional mechanism guiding cellulose pellicle formation is conserved between serovars. Data indicate that there is significant variation in fold change csgD/bcsA between serovars, although there is no significant difference in the interaction between strain and time (Table 5, Figure 7). We theorize that the differences in gene expression between these two genes are temporally unique, and therefore, may be mechanistically different. A greater number of replications across numerous strains would likely prove that point.
Starting at day 0 Salmonella Heidelberg and Kentucky, csgD/bcsA fold change was greater than Enteritidis, meaning csgD expression was higher prior to pellicle formation. By day 1, the difference in the ratio of csgD/bcsA was not different between serovars. The ratio increases significantly by day 3 for Enteritidis and Heidelberg and decreases for Kentucky, meaning Kentucky expresses less csgD than the other two serovars. All serovars had similar ratios in their gene expression on day 4.

4. Discussion and Conclusions

Extracellular biofilm formation in Salmonella requires polysaccharide cellulose and curli amyloid fimbrial structures [24]. Together, these biopolymers provide structure to the biofilm and support cell adhesion with the presence of both being necessary to produce fully functional and maximally resistant biofilms [23]. The transcriptional regulator csgD controls the production of curli fimbriae by positively regulating the csgBA operon which produces the protein components of curli [26]. In addition, csgD acts on the adrA promoter section, which results in the production of cyclic diguanylic acid (c-di-GMP), an allosteric activator of cellulose synthase encoded by the bcs operon [27]. Therefore, the activation of csgD not only produces curli proteins, but activates the bcsA operon. Because of the critical role these two genes provide in Salmonella biofilm formation, they were chosen for this study. Because the temporal activation of this machinery seemed to be different between serovars, as evidence from our study indicates, there may be serovar-specific mechanisms of biofilm formation. Whether this means that biofilms form sooner or later or that the machinery that drives the formation of the biofilm is executed differently, this could explain differences in recoverable Salmonella from biofilms in the poultry industry. The potential difference between serovars may also be exploitable. More evidence is needed to determine the full impact of our findings, including transcriptomic and proteomic studies evaluating biofilm formation differences between serovars. For instance, if Kentucky somehow does not produce biofilms as rapidly, maybe it is cleared better in specific environmental or physiological conditions or it is more susceptible to antimicrobials.
As such, it would be expected that increases in csgD expression would lead to increases in cellulose production and require the expression of the bcsA gene. In our current preliminary experiment, we found that each serovar exhibited a unique pattern of gene expression across time, with csgD a being much more volatile than bcsA. Furthermore, the changes of expression varied considerably over the days between all of the individual strains within serovar. Considering the ratio of csgD to bcsA, there were also minor differences between each serovar. Despite differences in the magnitude and direction of gene expression between different strains of Salmonella, the ratios were not significantly different in this pilot study. Additional data are required, including more strains, more replications, and additional gene expression analyses. By expanding on this study, we may potentially find differences between serovars that can serve as targets in the future for the development of new antimicrobials. Additionally, if one serovar expresses cellulose greater than the other, that particular gene cassette may be used for the production of cellulose.
Our study found there to be differences in the expression of biofilm-forming genes between serovars and large variations in gene expression between strains within each serovar. Future assessments should include a broader variety of serovars and additional replications to validate the qPCR data found in this paper. The replication and expansion of this data set must include additional common poultry isolates that are important to human health. However, the data presented herein are promising because if proven true, could potentially lead to novel understandings of individual serovar gene expression differences in biofilm formation.

Author Contributions

All authors wrote the paper and contributed to the paper analyses.

Funding

Support of DKD for this project was provided by the Center for Advanced Surface Engineering, under the National Science Foundation grant OIA-1457888 and the Arkansas EPSCoR Program, ASSET III.

Acknowledgments

The author Zhaohao Shi thanks the Mike Johnson Fellowship for their support. The author Dana K. Dittoe would like to acknowledge the Graduate College at the University of Arkansas for its support through the Distinguished Academy Fellowship and the continued support from the Center for Advanced Surface Engineering.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Scallan, E.; Hoekstra, R.M.; Angulo, F.J.; Tauxe, R.V.; Widdowson, M.A.; Roy, S.L.; Jones, J.L.; Griffin, P.M. Foodborne illness acquired in the United States—Major pathogens. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2011, 17, 7–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Foley, S.L.; Lynne, A.M.; Nayak, R. Salmonella challenges: Prevalence in swine and poultry and potential pathogenicity of such isolates. J. Anim. Sci. 2008, 86, E149–E162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Hanning, I.B.; Nutt, J.D.; Ricke, S.C. Salmonellosis outbreaks in the United States due to fresh produce: Sources and potential intervention measures. Foodborne Pathog. Dis. 2009, 6, 635–648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Foley, S.L.; Nayak, R.; Hanning, I.B.; Johnson, T.J.; Han, J.; Ricke, S.C. Population dynamics of Salmonella enterica serotypes in commercial egg and poultry production. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2011, 77, 4273–4279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Foley, S.L.; Johnson, T.J.; Ricke, S.C.; Nayak, R.; Danzeisen, J. Salmonella pathogenicity and host adaptation in chicken-associated serovars. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 2013, 77, 582–607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA); Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS). Serotypes Profile of Salmonella Isolates from Meat and Poultry Products, January 1998 through December 2014; United States Department of Agriculture, 2016. Available online: https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/connect/3866026a-582d-4f0e-a8ce-851b39c7390f/Salmonella-Serotype-Annual-2014.pdf?MOD=AJPERES (accessed on 5 April 2019).
  7. Finstad, S.; O'Bryan, C.A.; Marcy, J.A.; Crandall, P.G.; Ricke, S.C. Salmonella and broiler processing in the United States: Relationship to foodborne salmonellosis. Food Res. Int. 2012, 45, 789–794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Howard, Z.R.; O'Bryan, C.A.; Crandall, P.G.; Ricke, S.C. Salmonella Enteritidis in shell eggs: Current issues and prospects for control. Food Res. Int. 2012, 45, 755–764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Rabsch, W.; Hargis, B.M.; Tsolis, R.M.; Kingsley, R.A.; Hinz, K.-H.; Tschäpe, H.; Bäumler, A.J. Competitive exclusion of Salmonella enteritidis by Salmonella gallinarum in Poultry. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2000, 6, 443–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Ricke, S.C. Insights and challenges of Salmonella infection of laying hens. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 2017, 18, 43–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Gast, R.K.; Guard-Bouldin, J.; Holt, P.S. Colonization of reproductive organs and internal contamination of eggs after experimental infection of laying hens with Salmonella heidelberg and Salmonella enteritidis. Avian Dis. 2004, 48, 863–869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Gast, R.K.; Guraya, R.; Guard-Bouldin, J.; Holt, P.S.; Moore, R.W. Colonization of specific regions of the reproductive tract and deposition at different locations inside eggs laid by hens infected with Salmonella Enteritidis or Salmonella Heidelberg. Avian Dis. 2007, 51, 40–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Kaldhone, P.R.; Foley, S.L.; Ricke, S.C. Salmonella Heidelberg in layer hens and egg production: Incidence and potential issues. In Producing Safe. Eggs; Ricke, S.C., Gast, R.K., Eds.; Elsevier Inc.: San Diego, CA, USA, 2017; Chapter 12; pp. 235–256. Available online: https://0-www-sciencedirect-com.brum.beds.ac.uk/science/article/pii/B9780128025826000124 (accessed on 1 May 2019).
  14. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Reports of Selected Salmonella Outbreak Investigations 2018. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/salmonella/outbreaks.html (accessed on 15 April 2019).
  15. Kingsley, R.A.; Bäumler, A.J. Host adaptation and the emergence of infectious disease: The Salmonella paradigm. Mol. Microbiol. 2000, 36, 1006–1014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Uzzau, S.; Brown, D.J.; Wallis, T.; Rubino, S.; Leori, G.; Bernard, S.; Casadesús, J.; Platt, D.J.; Olsen, J.E. Host adapted serotypes of Salmonella enterica. Epidemiol. Infect. 2000, 125, 229–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. McClelland, M.; Sanderson, K.E.; Clifton, S.W.; Latreille, P.; Porwollik, S.; Sabo, A.; Meyer, R.; Bieri, T.; Ozersky, P.; McLellan, M. Comparison of genome degradation in Paratyphi A and Typhi, human-restricted serovars of Salmonella enterica that cause typhoid. Nat. Genet. 2004, 36, 1268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Feasey, N.A.; Dougan, G.; Kingsley, R.A.; Heyderman, R.S.; Gordon, M.A. Invasive non-typhoidal Salmonella disease: An emerging and neglected tropical disease in Africa. Lancet 2012, 379, 2489–2499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Donlan, R.M. Biofilms: Microbial Life on Surfaces. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2002, 8, 881–890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Steenackers, H.; Hermans, K.; Vanderleyden, J.; De Keersmaecker, S.C.J. Salmonella biofilms: An overview on occurrence, structure, regulation and eradication. Food Res. Int. 2012, 45, 502–531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Vestby, L.K.; Møretrø, T.; Langsrud, S.; Heir, E.; Nesse, L.L. Biofilm forming abilities of Salmonella are correlated with persistence in fish meal-and feed factories. BMC Vet. Res. 2009, 5, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Flemming, H.-C.; Wingender, J. The biofilm matrix. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2010, 8, 623–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Solano, C.; García, B.; Valle, J.; Berasain, C.; Ghigo, J.M.; Gamazo, C.; Lasa, I. Genetic analysis of Salmonella enteritidis biofilm formation: Critical role of cellulose. Mol. Microbiol. 2002, 43, 793–808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Zogaj, X.; Nimtz, M.; Rohde, M.; Bokranz, W.; Römling, U. The multicellular morphotypes of Salmonella typhimurium and Escherichia coli produce cellulose as the second component of the extracellular matrix. Mol. Microbiol. 2001, 39, 1452–1463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. White, A.; Gibson, D.; Kim, W.; Kay, W.; Surette, M. Thin aggregative fimbriae and cellulose enhance long-term survival and persistence of Salmonella. J. Bacteriol. 2006, 188, 3219–3227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Barnhart, M.M.; Chapman, M.R. Curli biogenesis and function. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 2006, 60, 131–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Verstraeten, N.; Braeken, K.; Debkumari, B.; Fauvart, M.; Fransaer, J.; Vermant, J.; Michiels, J. Living on a surface: Swarming and biofilm formation. Trends Microbiol. 2008, 16, 496–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. Changes in expression of the gene csgD from planktonic cells used to form Salmonella pellicles over a 4-days time period 1. qRT-PCR was performed on total RNA isolated from bacterial cultures of Salmonella as pellicles were being formed over a 4-day time period. 1 N = 270, n = 54, p < 0.0001, Individual SEM for day 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 was 0.231, 0.285, 0.242, 0.226, and 0.387 respectively.
Figure 1. Changes in expression of the gene csgD from planktonic cells used to form Salmonella pellicles over a 4-days time period 1. qRT-PCR was performed on total RNA isolated from bacterial cultures of Salmonella as pellicles were being formed over a 4-day time period. 1 N = 270, n = 54, p < 0.0001, Individual SEM for day 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 was 0.231, 0.285, 0.242, 0.226, and 0.387 respectively.
Microorganisms 07 00196 g001
Figure 2. Differences in expression of the gene csgD between serovars 1,2. qRT-PCR was performed on total RNA isolated from bacterial cultures of Salmonella as pellicles were being formed over a 4-day time period. 1 N = 270, n = 90, p < 0.0001, Individual SEM was 0.170, 0.184, 0.253 for S. Enteritidis, Heidelberg, and Kentucky. 2 Means with different superscripts are considered significantly different (a–b).
Figure 2. Differences in expression of the gene csgD between serovars 1,2. qRT-PCR was performed on total RNA isolated from bacterial cultures of Salmonella as pellicles were being formed over a 4-day time period. 1 N = 270, n = 90, p < 0.0001, Individual SEM was 0.170, 0.184, 0.253 for S. Enteritidis, Heidelberg, and Kentucky. 2 Means with different superscripts are considered significantly different (a–b).
Microorganisms 07 00196 g002
Figure 3. Differences in expression of the gene csgD over time in strains of Salmonella Heidelberg (a), Enteritidis (b),and Kentucky (c) 1. qRT-PCR was performed on total RNA isolated from bacterial cultures of Salmonella as pellicles were being formed over a 4-day time period 1 N = 90, n = 6, p = 0.0006 (a), 0.003 (b), 0.0211 (c).
Figure 3. Differences in expression of the gene csgD over time in strains of Salmonella Heidelberg (a), Enteritidis (b),and Kentucky (c) 1. qRT-PCR was performed on total RNA isolated from bacterial cultures of Salmonella as pellicles were being formed over a 4-day time period 1 N = 90, n = 6, p = 0.0006 (a), 0.003 (b), 0.0211 (c).
Microorganisms 07 00196 g003
Figure 4. Changes in expression of the gene bcsA from planktonic cells used to form Salmonella pellicles over a 4-days time period 1. qRT-PCR was performed on total RNA isolated from bacterial cultures of Salmonella as pellicles were being formed over a 4-day time period. 1 N = 270, n = 54, p < 0.0001, Individual SEM for day 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 was 0.138, 0.273, 0.219, 0.220, and 0.319 respectively.
Figure 4. Changes in expression of the gene bcsA from planktonic cells used to form Salmonella pellicles over a 4-days time period 1. qRT-PCR was performed on total RNA isolated from bacterial cultures of Salmonella as pellicles were being formed over a 4-day time period. 1 N = 270, n = 54, p < 0.0001, Individual SEM for day 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 was 0.138, 0.273, 0.219, 0.220, and 0.319 respectively.
Microorganisms 07 00196 g004
Figure 5. Differences in expression of the gene bcsA between serovars 1,2. qRT-PCR was performed on total RNA isolated from bacterial cultures of Salmonella as pellicles were being formed over a 4-day time period. 1 N = 270, n = 90, p < 0.0019, Individual SEM was 0.175, 0.152, 0.242 for S. Enteritidis, Heidelberg, and Kentucky. 2 Means with different superscripts are considered significantly different (a–b).
Figure 5. Differences in expression of the gene bcsA between serovars 1,2. qRT-PCR was performed on total RNA isolated from bacterial cultures of Salmonella as pellicles were being formed over a 4-day time period. 1 N = 270, n = 90, p < 0.0019, Individual SEM was 0.175, 0.152, 0.242 for S. Enteritidis, Heidelberg, and Kentucky. 2 Means with different superscripts are considered significantly different (a–b).
Microorganisms 07 00196 g005
Figure 6. Differences in expression of the gene bcsA over time in strains of Salmonella Heidelberg (a), Enteritidis (b),and Kentucky (c) 1. qRT-PCR was performed on total RNA isolated from bacterial cultures of Salmonella as pellicles were being formed over a 4-day time period 1 N = 90, n = 6, p < 0.0001 (a), 0.0222 (b), 0.0152 (c).
Figure 6. Differences in expression of the gene bcsA over time in strains of Salmonella Heidelberg (a), Enteritidis (b),and Kentucky (c) 1. qRT-PCR was performed on total RNA isolated from bacterial cultures of Salmonella as pellicles were being formed over a 4-day time period 1 N = 90, n = 6, p < 0.0001 (a), 0.0222 (b), 0.0152 (c).
Microorganisms 07 00196 g006
Figure 7. Comparison of changes in expression of the ratio of the genes csgD and bcsA in Salmonella serovars over time 1. qRT-PCR was performed on total RNA isolated from bacterial cultures of Salmonella as pellicles were being formed over a 96 h time period. Individual SEM was 1.450, 2.126, 1.808, 0.741, and 0.560, for S. Enteritidis, 0.516,0.472, 0.963, 0.620, and 0.209 for S. Heidelberg, and 2.960, 2.026, 2.062, 2.067, and 0.227 for S. Kentucky on day 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. 1 N = 270, n = 18, p =0.0065.
Figure 7. Comparison of changes in expression of the ratio of the genes csgD and bcsA in Salmonella serovars over time 1. qRT-PCR was performed on total RNA isolated from bacterial cultures of Salmonella as pellicles were being formed over a 96 h time period. Individual SEM was 1.450, 2.126, 1.808, 0.741, and 0.560, for S. Enteritidis, 0.516,0.472, 0.963, 0.620, and 0.209 for S. Heidelberg, and 2.960, 2.026, 2.062, 2.067, and 0.227 for S. Kentucky on day 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. 1 N = 270, n = 18, p =0.0065.
Microorganisms 07 00196 g007
Table 1. Changes in expression of the gene CsgD from planktonic cells used to form Salmonella pellicles over a 4-day time period 1,2.
Table 1. Changes in expression of the gene CsgD from planktonic cells used to form Salmonella pellicles over a 4-day time period 1,2.
Day
01234
CsgD nCT2.157 ± 0.231 ab2.346 ± 0.285 ab1.641 ± 0.242 bc1.151 ± 0.226 c2.884 ± 0.387 a
1 N = 270, n = 54, Means of nCT values and individual SEMs are given for each strain at each time point. 2 Means with different superscripts are considered significantly different (a–c).
Table 2. Changes in expression of the gene csgD from planktonic cells used to form pellicles in Salmonella Kentucky, Enteritidis, and Heidelberg over a 4-day time period.1,2,3.
Table 2. Changes in expression of the gene csgD from planktonic cells used to form pellicles in Salmonella Kentucky, Enteritidis, and Heidelberg over a 4-day time period.1,2,3.
Day
01234
S. Enteritidis
38-00860.788 ± 0.139 abc1.442 ± 0.190 abc0.667 ± 0.21 bc0.53 ± 0.385 bc−0.28 ± 0.24 c
38-00870.887 ± 0.227 abc0.218 ± 0.553 bc1.843 ± 0.472 abc0.722 ± 0.437 abc3.449 ± 1.545 a
38-00880.762 ± 0.108 abc1.328 ± 0.389 abc0.438 ± 0.284 bc0.057 ± 0.141 c3.008 ± 1.142 ab
S. Heidelberg
38-01263.617 ± 0.461 abc3.267 ± 0.565 abcd1.767 ± 0.317 bcde1.552 ± 0.451 bcde2.002 ± 0.374 bcde
38-01272.575 ± 0.452 abcde2.43 ± 0.81 abcde0.86 ± 0.305 de1.794 ± 0.261 bcde4.928 ± 0.956 a
38-01282.483 ± 0.111 abcde4.182 ± 0.928 ab1.363 ± 0.343 cde0.155 ± 0.876 e1.383 ± 0.152 bcde
S. Kentucky
38-00554.333 ± 0.904 ab4.425 ± 1.476 ab3.898 ± 1.714 ab3.313 ± 1.33 ab2.538 ± 0.474 ab
38-00842.955 ± 0.068 ab1.752 ± 0.235 b1.628 ± 0.263 b0.719 ± 0.117 b2.186 ± 0.421 b
38-00854.256 ± 0.692 ab2.068 ± 0.296 b2.308 ± 0.427 b1.522 ± 0.155 b6.809 ± 1.114 a
1 Each serovar was analyzed separately from others to determine the interaction between specific strains within strains and day. Means of nCT values and individual SEMs are given for each strain at each time point. 2 N = 90, n = 6. 3 Means with different superscripts in the same serovar are considered significantly different with serovar (a–e).
Table 3. Changes in expression of the gene bcsA from planktonic cells used to form Salmonella pellicles over a 4-day time period 1,2.
Table 3. Changes in expression of the gene bcsA from planktonic cells used to form Salmonella pellicles over a 4-day time period 1,2.
Day
01234
BcsA nCT0.766 ± 0.138 c1.815 ± 0.273 ab0.932 ± 0.219 bc0.766 ± 0.22 c2.217 ± 0.319 a
1 N = 270, n = 54, Means of nCT values and individual SEMs are given for each strain at each time point. 2 Means with different superscripts are considered significantly different (a–c).
Table 4. Changes in expression of the gene bcsA from planktonic cells used to form pellicles in Salmonella Kentucky, Enteritidis, and Heidelberg over a 4-day time period 1,2,3.
Table 4. Changes in expression of the gene bcsA from planktonic cells used to form pellicles in Salmonella Kentucky, Enteritidis, and Heidelberg over a 4-day time period 1,2,3.
Day
01234
S. Enteritidis
38-0086−0.115 ± 0.101 b0.645 ± 0.275 b0.557 ± 0.175 b0.558 ± 0.354 b0.059 ± 0.105 b
38-00870.107 ± 0.296 b0.742 ± 0.423 b1.14 ± 0.315 b1.022 ± 0.402 b4.089 ± 1.521 a
38-0088−0.372 ± 0.175 b0.823 ± 0.467 b0.343 ± 0.184 b−0.103 ± 0.314 b2.247 ± 1.105 ab
S. Heidelberg
38-01261.948 ± 0.284 bc2.313 ± 0.39 b0.852 ± 0.219 bc0.392 ± 0.513 c1.097 ± 0.124 bc
38-01271.133 ± 0.162 bc1.39 ± 0.402 bc0.702 ± 0.118 bc1.433 ± 0.39 bc4.281 ± 0.4 a
38-01281.098 ± 0.194 bc4.263 ± 0.961 a0.899 ± 0.321 bc2.017 ± 0.071 bc1.39 ± 0.068 bc
S. Kentucky
38-00551.403 ± 0.688 abc3.842 ± 1.511 ab3.382 ± 1.982 abc2.228 ± 1.805 abc1.134 ± 0.159 abc
38-00840.727 ± 0.128 abc0.938 ± 0.26 abc0.332 ± 0.16 bc−0.359 ± 0.126 c1.126 ± 0.149 abc
38-00850.963 ± 0.361 abc1.378 ± 0.183 abc0.587 ± 0.302 abc0.16 ± 0.192 bc4.532 ± 1.237 a
1 Each serovar was analyzed separately from others to determine the interaction between specific strains within strains and day. Means of nCT values and individual SEMs are given for each strain at each time point. 2 N = 90, n = 6. 3 Means with different superscripts in the same serovar are considered significantly different with serovar (a–e).
Table 5. Comparison of changes in expression of the ratio of the genes csgD and bcsA in the interaction between Salmonella serovars and a 4-day time period 1,2.
Table 5. Comparison of changes in expression of the ratio of the genes csgD and bcsA in the interaction between Salmonella serovars and a 4-day time period 1,2.
Day
01234
S. Enteritidis−0.230 ± 1.450 b1.485 ± 2.126 b−0.696 ± 1.808 b0.741 ± 0.741 b0.768 ± 0.530 b
S. Heidelberg2.575 ± 0.516 ab1.235 ± 0.472 b2.936 ± 0.963 ab0.2638 ± 0.620 b1.384 ± 0.205 b
S. Kentucky9.400 ± 2.960 a−1.083 ± 2.026 b0.406 ± 2.062 b2.101 ± 2.087 ab1.646 ± 0.227 b
1 N = 270, n = 18, p = 0.0065, Means of nCT values and individual SEMs are given for each strain at each time point. 2 Means with different superscripts are considered significantly different (a–b).

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Shi, Z.; Dittoe, D.K.; Feye, K.M.; Kogut, M.; Ricke, S.C. Short Communication: Preliminary Differences Identified in Genes Responsible for Biofilm Formation in Poultry Isolates of Salmonella enterica Heidelberg, Enteritidis, and Kentucky. Microorganisms 2019, 7, 196. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/microorganisms7070196

AMA Style

Shi Z, Dittoe DK, Feye KM, Kogut M, Ricke SC. Short Communication: Preliminary Differences Identified in Genes Responsible for Biofilm Formation in Poultry Isolates of Salmonella enterica Heidelberg, Enteritidis, and Kentucky. Microorganisms. 2019; 7(7):196. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/microorganisms7070196

Chicago/Turabian Style

Shi, Zhaohao, Dana K. Dittoe, Kristina M. Feye, Mike Kogut, and Steven C. Ricke. 2019. "Short Communication: Preliminary Differences Identified in Genes Responsible for Biofilm Formation in Poultry Isolates of Salmonella enterica Heidelberg, Enteritidis, and Kentucky" Microorganisms 7, no. 7: 196. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/microorganisms7070196

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop