MBDS Solvent: An Improved Method for Assessment of Biofilms

DOI: 10.4236/aim.2013.32030   PDF   HTML   XML   7,195 Downloads   10,570 Views   Citations


Biofilms are recognised as an important contributor to bacterial resistance towards traditional antimicrobial treatments. Assessment of biofilm formation currently relies on a 96 well microtitre plate assay, which usually involves the colourimetric detection of stain (typically crystal violet) removed from previously stained biofilm. The amount of crystal violet released is then used as a quantitative indicator of the amount of biofilm formed. Currently, this is achieved by solubilisation of the stain by ethanol which results in partial decolourisation of the crystal violet stained biofilm which impacts the accuracy and reproducibility of this method. Herein, we describe a modified biofilm dissolving solution (MBDS) which produces a more uniform and reproducible colour release from stained biofilm through solubilisation of the biofilm architecture itself. Here we use crystal violet stained biofilms of P. aeruginosa strain PA0-1, to demonstrate an approximate two fold increase in crystal violet release by MBDS, as compared to ethanol treatment. In addition, when ethanol decolourised biofilms were treated again with MBDS, an almost equal amount of remnant crystal violet was recovered by dissolving the biofilm and the stain trapped within it. These results were reflected in microscopic analysis of ethanol treated and MBDS treated biofilm. Similar results were obtained when MBDS was used to decolourise and dissolve the biofilms of a number of other bacterial species highlighting the advantages of MDBS as a universal solvent for the colour detection of biofilm.

Share and Cite:

G. Tram, V. Korolik and C. Day, "MBDS Solvent: An Improved Method for Assessment of Biofilms," Advances in Microbiology, Vol. 3 No. 2, 2013, pp. 200-204. doi: 10.4236/aim.2013.32030.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] G. O’Toole, H. Kaplan and R. Kolter, “Biofilm Formation as Micrbobial Development,” Annual Review of Microbiology, Vol. 54, No. 4, 2000, pp. 49-79. doi:10.1146/annurev.micro.54.1.49
[2] R. Djeribi, W. Bouchloukh, T. Jouenne and B. Menaa, “Characterization of Bacterial Biofilms Formed on Urinary Catheters,” American Journal of Infection Control, Vol. 40, No. 9, 2012, pp. 854-959. doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2011.10.009
[3] J. Bryers, “Medical Biofilms,” Biotechnology and Bioengineering, Vol. 100, No. 1, 2008, pp.1-18. doi:10.1002/bit.21838
[4] T. Bjarnsholt, P. Jensen, M. Fiandaca, J. Pedersen, C. Hansen and C. Andersen, “Pseudomonas aeruginosa Biofilms in the Respiratory Tract of Cystic Fibrosis Patients,” Pediatric Pulmonology, Vol. 44, No. 6, 2009, pp. 547-558. doi:10.1002/ppul.21011
[5] A. Agarwal, K. Singh and A. Jain, “Medical Significance and Management of Staphylococcal Biofilm,” Immunology and Medical Microbiolgy, Vol. 58, No. 2, 2009, pp. 147-160. doi:10.1111/j.1574-695X.2009.00601.x
[6] X. Ge, T. Kitten, Z. Chen, S. Lee, C. Munro and P. Xu, “Identification of Streptococcus Sanguinis Genes Required for Biofilm Formation and Examination of Their Role in Endocarditis Virulence,” Infection and Immunity, Vol. 76, No. 6, 2008, pp. 2551-2559. doi:10.1128/IAI.00338-08
[7] S. Branda, S. Vik, L. Friedman and R. Kolter, “Biofilms: The Matrix Revisited,” Trends in Microbiology, Vol. 13, No. 1, 2005, pp. 20-26. doi:10.1016/j.tim.2004.11.006
[8] D. Lopez, H. Vlamakis and R. Kolter, “Biofilms,” Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory Press, New York, 2010.
[9] M. Boyle, T. Ford, J. Maki and R. Mitchell, “Biofilms and the Survival of Opportunistic Pathogens in Recycled Water,” Waste Management and Research, Vol. 9, No. 5, 1991, pp. 465-470. doi:10.1016/0734-242X(91)90077-K
[10] Y. Shen, S. Stojicic and M. Haapasalo, “Bacterial Viability in Starved and Revitalized Biofilms: Comparison of Viability Staining and Direct Culture,” Journal of Endodontics, Vol. 36, No. 11, 2010, pp. 1820-1823. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2010.08.029
[11] K. Hughes, I. Sutherland and M. Jones, “Biofilm Susceptibility to Bacteriophage Attack: The Role of Phage-Borne Polysaccharide Depolymerase,” Microbiology, Vol. 144, No. 11, 1998, pp. 3039-3047. doi:10.1099/00221287-144-11-3039
[12] J. Gooderham, M. Bains, J McPhee, I. Wiegand and R. Hancock, “Induction by Cationic Antimicrobial Peptides and Involvement in Intrinsic Polymyxin and Antimicrobial Peptide Resistance, Biofilm Formation, and Swarming Motility of PsrA in Pseudomonas aeruginosa,” Journal of Bacteriology, Vol. 190, No. 16, 2008, pp. 5624-5634. doi:10.1128/JB.00594-08
[13] J. Overhage, A. Campisano, M. Bains, E. Torfs, B. Rehm and R. Hancock, “Human Host Defense Peptide LL-37 Prevents Bacterial Biofilm Formation,” Infection and Immunity, Vol. 76, No. 9, 2008, pp. 4176-4182. doi:10.1128/IAI.00318-08

comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2020 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.