Journal of Bacteriology, September 2000, p. 4856-4861, Vol. 182, No. 17
0021-9193/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.

and
Departments of Biochemistry and Genetics,
University of Wisconsin
Madison, Madison, Wisconsin 53706
Received 11 May 1998/Accepted 13 June 2000
Various Ca2+ antagonists used in animal research, many
of them known to be Ca2+ channel blockers, inhibited
Escherichia coli chemotaxis (measured as entry of cells
into a capillary containing attractant). The most effective of these,
acting in the nanomolar range, was
-conotoxin GVIA. The next most
effective were gallopamil and verapamil. At concentrations around
100-fold higher than that needed for inhibition of chemotaxis, each of
these antagonists inhibited motility (measured as entry of cells into a
capillary lacking attractant). Various other Ca2+
antagonists were less effective, though chemotaxis was almost always
more sensitive to inhibition than was motility. Cells treated with each
of these Ca2+ antagonists swam with a running bias, i.e.,
tumbling was inhibited. Similarly, some Na+ antagonists
used in animal research inhibited bacterial chemotaxis. E. coli chemotaxis was inhibited by saxitoxin at concentrations above 10
7 M, while more than 10
4 M was
needed to inhibit motility. Cells treated with saxitoxin swam with a
tumbling bias. In the case of other Na+ antagonists in
animals, aconitine inhibited bacterial chemotaxis 10 times more
effectively than it inhibited motility, and two others inhibited
chemotaxis and motility at about the same concentration. In the case of
K+ antagonists used in animal research, 4-aminopyridine
blocked E. coli chemotaxis between 10
3 M and,
totally, 10
2 M, while motility was not affected at
10
2 M; on the other hand, tetraethylammonium chloride
failed to inhibit either chemotaxis or motility at 10
2 M.
Madison, 433 Babcock Dr.,
Madison, WI 53706. Phone: (608) 262-3693. Fax: (608) 262-3453. E-mail: adler{at}biochem.wisc.edu.
Present address: Department of Microbiology, University of New
Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824.
Present address: Department of Biology and Program in Molecular
Biology and Biotechnology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill,
NC 27599.
This article has been cited by other articles:
| Appl. Environ. Microbiol. | Infect. Immun. | Eukaryot. Cell |
|---|---|---|
| Mol. Cell. Biol. | J. Virol. | Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. |
| ALL ASM JOURNALS |