Effect of Ca2+ and Mg2+ cations on surface charges of erythrocytes and lactobacilli Streptococcus thermophilus and their adhesive interaction
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15407/dopovidi2015.01.159Keywords:
adhesive, cations, erythrocytes, interaction, lactobacilliAbstract
We propose a simple accessible model of lactobacilli adhesion to human erythrocytes. The effects of divalent (Ca2+, Mg2+) cations on the surface charge of erythrocytes and lactobacilli S. thermophilus and their adhesive interaction have been studied. We have shown that, despite the similar unidirectional influence of Ca2+ and Mg2+ cations on lactobacillus S. thermophilus adhesion to human erythrocytes, the underlying causes of these influences are different. While the Ca2+ ions affect erythrocyte's surface charge but do not change it in S. thermophilus, the Mg2+ ions, on the contrary, influence the lactobacilli surface charge and do not affect the charge of erythrocytes. This result supports the assumption that, in this case, the divalent cations affect the second irreversible stage of the adhesive process rather than the physical interactions of the first reversible stage.
Downloads
References
Anikieieva M., Gordiyenko O. Periodicum biologorum, 2014, 116, No 1: 89–93.
Anikieieva M. O., Kovalenko I. F., Kovalenko S. E., Gordiyenko O. I. Biofiz. visn. 2014, 31, No 1: 35–41 (in Ukrainian).
Israelachvili J. Intermolecular and Surface forces, 3rd ed., Burlington: Academic Press, 2011.
Bos R., van der Mei H. C., Busscher H. J. FEMS Microbiol. Rev., 1999, 23: 179–230. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6976.1999.tb00396.x
An Y. H., Friedman R. J. J. Biomed. Mat., 1998, 43: 338–348. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199823)43:3<338::AID-JBM16>3.0.CO;2-B
Martinez-Gil M., Romero D., Kolter R., Espinosa-Urgela M. J. Bacteriol.– 2012, 194, No 24: 6782–6789. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.01094-12
Arrizubieta M. J., Toledo-Arana A., Amorena B. et al. J. Bacteriol. 2004, 186: 7490–7498. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.186.22.7490-7498.2004
Gambaro G., Baggio B., Cicerello E. et al. Diabetes, 1988, 37: 745–748. https://doi.org/10.2337/diab.37.6.745
Cruz L. F., Cobine P. A., De La Fuente L. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 2012, 78: 1321–1331. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.06501-11
Garrison-Schilling K. L. Environ. Microbiol., 2011, 13: 643–654. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2010.02369.x
Chauviere G., Coconnier M.-H., Kerneis S. et al. J. Gen. Microbiol., 1992, 138: 1689–1696. https://doi.org/10.1099/00221287-138-8-1689
Lim S.-M., Ahn D.-H. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 2012, 22, No 12: 1731–1739. https://doi.org/10.4014/jmb.1208.08049
Mahalingam B., Ajroud K., Alonso J. L. et al. J. Immunology, 2011, 187: 6393–6401. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.1102394
Gagneux P., Cheriyan M., Hurtado-Ziola N. et al. J. Biol. Chem. 2003, 278, No 48: 48245–48250. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M309813200
Evans D. G., Evans D. J. Methods in Enzymology, 1995, 253: 336–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0076-6879(95)53029-0
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Reports of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
