ArticlePloS one2025
Differentiating bacteria by their unique surface interactions.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
New, rapid, and accessible approaches to bacterial detection are necessary to help curb the rising impacts of antimicrobial resistance. In this study, we introduce a technique that distinguishes bacteria through their unique surface interactions. By measuring and combining the interaction strengths of a bacterium across a set of chemically defined surfaces, we produced a novel bacterial identifier termed the surface interaction profile (SIP). The interaction strengths of twelve test bacteria across three discrete polyelectrolyte multilayer films (PEMs) were measured, facilitated by introducing each bacterial suspension to individual PEMs in microfluidic channels over a 10-minute interaction period and rinsing to remove bulk and loosely bound bacteria. The remaining surface-bound cells were counted via microscopy and plotted against suspension concentrations to build attachment curves whose slopes were measured as the strength of interaction for a given bacteria-PEM combination. These slopes were collected, per bacterial type, to produce each SIP. SIPs were capable of distinguishing between our pathogenic strains (Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Enterococcus faecalis, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, and vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus) by Gram stain and individual species, and each blind test pathogen was successfully identified through SIP comparison. Furthermore, SIPs were also successful at differentiating between select Staphylococcus aureus walKR mutants impacting cell wall metabolism and high-risk antibiotic resistance mutants (MRSA and VISA), highlighting the utility and future diagnostic potential of this technique.
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.