ArticlePloS one2024
Comparative proteomics analysis of biofilms and planktonic cells of Enterococcus faecalis and Staphylococcus lugdunensis with contrasting biofilm-forming ability.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Investigation on physical and physiological properties of extracellular vesicles derived from Enterococcus faecalis.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Characterization ofBiofilm · 2025Article
- Clinical Significance and Microbiological Characteristics ofJournal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biofilms make it difficult to eradicate bacterial infections through antibiotic treatments and lead to numerous complications. Previously, two periprosthetic infection-related pathogens, Enterococcus faecalis and Staphylococcus lugdunensis were reported to have relatively contrasting biofilm-forming abilities. In this study, we examined the proteomics of the two microorganisms' biofilms using LC-MS/MS. The results showed that each microbe exhibited an overall different profile for differential gene expressions between biofilm and planktonic cells as well as between each other. Of a total of 929 proteins identified in the biofilms of E. faecalis, 870 proteins were shared in biofilm and planktonic cells, and 59 proteins were found only in the biofilm. In S. lugdunensis, a total of 1125 proteins were identified, of which 1072 proteins were found in common in the biofilm and planktonic cells, and 53 proteins were present only in the biofilms. The functional analysis for the proteins identified only in the biofilms using UniProt keywords demonstrated that they were mostly assigned to membrane, transmembrane, and transmembrane helix in both microorganisms, while hydrolase and transferase were found only in E. faecalis. Protein-protein interaction analysis using STRING-db indicated that the resulting networks did not have significantly more interactions than expected. GO term analysis exhibited that the highest number of proteins were assigned to cellular process, catalytic activity, and cellular anatomical entity. KEGG pathway analysis revealed that microbial metabolism in diverse environments was notable for both microorganisms. Taken together, proteomics data discovered in this study present a unique set of biofilm-embedded proteins of each microorganism, providing useful information for diagnostic purposes and the establishment of appropriately tailored treatment strategies. Furthermore, this study has significance in discovering the target candidate molecules to control the biofilm-associated infections of E. faecalis and S. lugdunensis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.