Bacterial biofilms have long been recognized as a source of persistent infections and industrial contamination with their intransigence generally attributed to their protective layer of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS). EPS, consisting of secreted nucleic acids, proteins, and polysaccharides, make it difficult to fully eliminate biofilms by conventional chemical or physical means. Since most bacteria are capable of forming biofilms, understanding how biofilms respond to new antibiotic compounds and components of the immune system has important ramifications. Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) are both potential novel antibiotic compounds and part of the immune response in many different organisms. Here, we u... More
Bacterial biofilms have long been recognized as a source of persistent infections and industrial contamination with their intransigence generally attributed to their protective layer of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS). EPS, consisting of secreted nucleic acids, proteins, and polysaccharides, make it difficult to fully eliminate biofilms by conventional chemical or physical means. Since most bacteria are capable of forming biofilms, understanding how biofilms respond to new antibiotic compounds and components of the immune system has important ramifications. Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) are both potential novel antibiotic compounds and part of the immune response in many different organisms. Here, we use atomic force microscopy to investigate the biomechanical changes that occur in individual cells when a biofilm is exposed to the AMP magainin 2 (MAG2), which acts by permeabilizing bacterial membranes. While MAG2 is able to prevent biofilm initiation, cells in an established biofilm can withstand exposure to high concentrations of MAG2. Treated cells in the biofilm are classified into two distinct populations after treatment: one population of cells is indistinguishable from untreated cells, maintaining cellular turgor pressure and a smooth outer surface, and the second population of cells are softer than untreated cells and have a rough outer surface after treatment. Notably, the latter population is similar to planktonic cells treated with MAG2. The EPS likely reduces the local MAG2 concentration around the stiffer cells since once the EPS was enzymatically removed, all cells became softer and had rough outer surfaces. Thus, while MAG2 appears to have the same mechanism of action in biofilm cells as in planktonic ones, MAG2 cannot eradicate a biofilm unless coupled with the removal of the EPS.
