JB
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] --
JB Accepts, published online ahead of print on 31 August 2007
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Other Versions of this Article:
JB.00566-07v1
189/22/8005    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Merritt, P. M.
Right arrow Articles by Fuqua, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Merritt, P. M.
Right arrow Articles by Fuqua, C.
J. Bacteriol. doi:10.1128/JB.00566-07
Copyright (c) 2007, American Society for Microbiology and/or the Listed Authors/Institutions. All Rights Reserved.

Motility and Chemotaxis in Agrobacterium tumefaciens Surface Attachment and Biofilm Formation

Peter M. Merritt, Thomas Danhorn, and Clay Fuqua*

Department of Biology, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: cfuqua{at}indiana.edu.


   Abstract

Bacterial motility mechanisms including swimming, swarming and twitching are known to have important roles in biofilm formation, including colonization and the subsequent expansion into mature structured surface communities. Directed motility requires chemotaxis functions that are conserved among many bacterial species. The biofilm-forming plant pathogen Agrobacterium tumefaciens drives swimming motility by utilizing a small group of flagella, localized to a single pole, or the subpolar region of the cell. There is no evidence for twitching or swarming motilities in A. tumefaciens. Site-specific deletion mutations that resulted in either aflagellate, flagellated but nonmotile, or flagellated but nonchemotactic A. tumefaciens derivatives were examined for biofilm formation under static and flowing conditions. Nonmotile mutants were significantly deficient for biofilm formation under static conditions. Under flowing conditions however, the aflagellate mutant rapidly formed aberrantly dense, tall biofilms. In contrast a nonmotile mutant with unpowered flagella was clearly debilitated for biofilm formation in flow relative to wild type. A non-tumbling chemotaxis mutant was only weakly affected for biofilm formation in non-flowing conditions, but notably compromised in flow, generating less adherent biomass than wild type and a more dispersed cellular arrangement. Extragenic suppressor mutants of the chemotaxis-impaired, straight-swimming phenotype were readily isolated from motility agar plates. These mutants regained tumbling at a frequency similar to wild type. Despite this phenotype, biofilm formation by the suppressor mutants in static cultures was significantly deficient. Under flowing conditions a representative suppressor mutant manifested a phenotype similar to, yet distinct from its nonchemotactic parent.







Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] --
Appl. Environ. Microbiol. Infect. Immun. Eukaryot. Cell
Mol. Cell. Biol. J. Virol. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev.
ALL ASM JOURNALS

Copyright © 2007 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.