Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25803828›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Prevention of biofilm formation and removal of existing biofilms by extracellular DNases of Campylobacter jejuni.

Helen L Brown, Mark Reuter, Kate Hanman, Roy P Betts, Arnoud H M van Vliet

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
9.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  8. AMicrobial genomics · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Molecular Mechanisms of Campylobacter Biofilm Formation and Quorum Sensing.Current topics in microbiology and immunology · 2021
    Review
  11. Bridging the Gap: A Role forMicroorganisms · 2020
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Frontiers in microbiology · 2019
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Intrinsic and Extrinsic Aspects onFrontiers in microbiology · 2017
    Article
  20. Article
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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Helen L BrownInstitute of Food Research, Norwich Research Park, Colney Lane, Norwich, NR4 7UA, United Kingdom.
Mark ReuterInstitute of Food Research, Norwich Research Park, Colney Lane, Norwich, NR4 7UA, United Kingdom.
Kate HanmanInstitute of Food Research, Norwich Research Park, Colney Lane, Norwich, NR4 7UA, United Kingdom.
Roy P BettsCampden BRI, Station Road, Chipping Campden, Gloucestershire, GL55 6LD, United Kingdom.
Arnoud H M van VlietInstitute of Food Research, Norwich Research Park, Colney Lane, Norwich, NR4 7UA, United Kingdom.
Norwich Research Park · GBQuadram Institute · GBCampden BRI (United Kingdom) · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/I15321/1Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/J004529/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The fastidious nature of the foodborne bacterial pathogen Campylobacter jejuni contrasts with its ability to survive in the food chain. The formation of biofilms, or the integration into existing biofilms by C. jejuni, is thought to contribute to food chain survival. As extracellular DNA (eDNA) has previously been proposed to play a role in C. jejuni biofilms, we have investigated the role of extracellular DNases (eDNases) produced by C. jejuni in biofilm formation. A search of 2791 C. jejuni genomes highlighted that almost half of C. jejuni genomes contains at least one eDNase gene, but only a minority of isolates contains two or three of these eDNase genes, such as C. jejuni strain RM1221 which contains the cje0256, cje0566 and cje1441 eDNase genes. Strain RM1221 did not form biofilms, whereas the eDNase-negative strains NCTC 11168 and 81116 did. Incubation of pre-formed biofilms of NCTC 11168 with live C. jejuni RM1221 or with spent medium from a RM1221 culture resulted in removal of the biofilm. Inactivation of the cje1441 eDNase gene in strain RM1221 restored biofilm formation, and made the mutant unable to degrade biofilms of strain NCTC 11168. Finally, C. jejuni strain RM1221 was able to degrade genomic DNA from C. jejuni NCTC 11168, 81116 and RM1221, whereas strain NCTC 11168 and the RM1221 cje1441 mutant were unable to do so. This was mirrored by an absence of eDNA in overnight cultures of C. jejuni RM1221. This suggests that the activity of eDNases in C. jejuni affects biofilm formation and is not conducive to a biofilm lifestyle. These eDNases do however have a potential role in controlling biofilm formation by C. jejuni strains in food chain relevant environments.

Indexed as

Food MicrobiologyBiofilmsCampylobacter jejuniDeoxyribonucleasesDNA PrimersExtracellular SpaceGentian VioletGreen Fluorescent ProteinsIndolesSpecies SpecificityDAPIDeoxyribonucleasesDNA PrimersGentian VioletGreen Fluorescent ProteinsIndoles

Identifiers

PMID25803828
PMCPMC4372405
OpenAlexW2065944902

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.