Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19552706›Full record

ReviewFEMS microbiology letters2009

Cross-kingdom interactions: Candida albicans and bacteria.

Mark E Shirtliff, Brian M Peters, Mary Ann Jabra-Rizk

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in FEMS microbiology letters, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 204 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
204citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

204 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Hijacking competitor-derived signals: RcsB/C drivesApplied and environmental microbiology · 2026
    Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. MitigatingBiofilm · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Evaluation of the antagonistic effect ofIranian journal of microbiology · 2025
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Salivary mycobiome alterations in HIV-infected MSM: dominance ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025
    Article
  17. Multifaceted roles ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Biofilm · 2024
    Article
  20. Review

144 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Mark E ShirtliffDepartment of Microbial Pathogenesis, Dental School, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA. mrizk@umaryland.edu
Brian M Peters
Mary Ann Jabra-Rizk

Funding

Staphylococcus aureus biofilms: in vitro and in vivo studiesR01AI069568 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI SHIRTLIFF, MARK E · 2007 to 2011
$2.1M
Candida albicans and Staphylococcus aureus dual species biofilmsR01DE020939 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI JABRA-RIZK, MARY ANN Y · 2010 to 2014
$1.8M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI069568NIDCR NIH HHS R01 DE020939
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bacteria and fungi are found together in a myriad of environments and particularly in a biofilm, where adherent species interact through diverse signaling mechanisms. Yet, despite billions of years of coexistence, the area of research exploring fungal-bacterial interactions, particularly within the context of polymicrobial infections, is still in its infancy. However, reports describing a multitude of wide-ranging interactions between the fungal pathogen Candida albicans and various bacterial pathogens are on the rise. An example of a mutually beneficial interaction is coaggregation, a phenomenon that takes place in oral biofilms where the adhesion of C. albicans to oral bacteria is considered crucial for its colonization of the oral cavity. In contrast, the interaction between C. albicans and Pseudomonas aeruginosa is described as being competitive and antagonistic in nature. Another intriguing interaction is that occurring between Staphylococcus aureus and C. albicans, which although not yet fully characterized, appears to be initially synergistic. These complex interactions between such diverse and important pathogens would have significant clinical implications if they occurred in an immunocompromised host. Therefore, understanding the mechanisms of adhesion and signaling involved in fungal-bacterial interactions may lead to the development of novel therapeutic strategies for impeding microbial colonization and development of polymicrobial disease.

Indexed as

Bacterial Physiological PhenomenaAnimalsBacterial AdhesionBacterial InfectionsBiofilmsCandida albicansCandidiasisHumans

Identifiers

PMID19552706
PMCPMC4406406

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.