Влияние физико-химических факторов среды на устойчивость бактериальных биопленок на основе микробных сообществ активного ила

Целью исследования являлось проведение оценки устойчивости бактериальных биопленок культур Alcaligenes faecalis 2, Achromobacter pulmonis, Paenibacillus odorifer и Bacillus subtilis при стрессирующем воздействии физико-химических факторов среды в процессе периодического культивирования. В качестве основных параметров были выбраны температура (10 и 50 °С) и pH среды (5,0 и 10,0), содержание поверхностно-активных веществ (додецилсульфат натрия) в концентрациях 5, 10 и 50 мг/дм³. Установлено, что в области низких температурных значений (10 °С) увеличивается массивность биопленки микроорганизмов Alcaligenes faecalis 2, Achromobacter pulmonis ПНОС и Bacillus subtilis. Отмечено, что бактериальная биопленка Alcaligenes faecalis 2 проявляет устойчивость и метаболическую активность в кислых условиях среды. При повышении значений pH среды до 10,0 происходит увеличение количества биопленки микроорганизмов Bacillus subtilis. При воздействии раствора додецилсульфата натрия в интервале от 5 до 10 мг/дм³ наблюдается процесс формирования бактериальной биопленки Alcaligenes faecalis 2, Bacillus subtilis, Achromobacter pulmonis ПНОС и Paenibacillus odorifer. Ответной реакцией на воздействие додецилсульфата натрия в области высоких концентраций (10 и 50 мг/дм³) является сохранение количества биомассы и массивности биопленки для штамма микроорганизмов Achromobacter pulmonis ПНОС. Таким образом, показана стрессоустойчивость рассмотренных культур под воздействием отрицательных внешних факторов среды, что может способствовать устойчивости микробных культур к различным видам поллютантов в технологиях очистки загрязненных сред.

1. Flemming H.-C., Wingender J., Szewzyk U., Steinberg P., Rice S.A., Kjelleberg S. Biofilms: an emergent form of bacterial life // Nature Reviews Microbiology. 2016. Vol. 14. P. 563–575. DOI: 10.1038/nrmicro.2016.94.

2. Stoodley P., Sauer K., Davies D.G., Costerton J.W. Biofilms as complex differentiated communities // Annual Review of Microbiology. 2002. Vol. 56. P. 187–209. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.micro.56.012302.160705.

3. Zhao X., Zhao F., Wang J., Zhong N. Biofilm formation and control strategies of foodborne pathogens: food safety perspectives // RSC Advances. 2017. Vol. 7, no. 58. P. 36670–36683. DOI: 10.1039/C7RA02497E.

4. Ouidir T., Gabriel B., Chabane Y.N. Overview of multispecies biofilms in different ecosystems: wastewater treatment, soil and oral cavity // Journal of Biotechnology. 2022. Vol. 350. P. 67–74. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2022.03.014.

5. Çam S., Brinkmeyer R. The effects of temperature, pH, and iron on biofilm formation by clinical versus environmental strains of Vibrio vulnificus // Folia Microbiologica. 2020. Vol. 65. P. 557–566. DOI: 10.1007/s12223-019-00761-9.

6. Zhang X.-S., García-Contreras R., Wood T.K. YcfR (BhsA) influences Escherichia coli biofilm formation through stress response and surface hydrophobicity // Journal of Bacteriology. 2007. Vol. 189, no. 8. P. 3051–3062. DOI: 10.1128/jb.01832-06.

7. Di Bonaventura G., Stepanović, S., Picciani C., Pompilio A., Piccolomini R. Effect of environmental factors on biofilm formation by clinical Stenotrophomonas maltophilia isolates // Folia Microbiologica. 2007. Vol. 52, no. 1. P. 86–90. DOI: 10.1007/BF02932144.

8. Bisht K., Moore J.L., Caprioli R.M., Skaar E.P., Wakeman C.A. Impact of temperature-dependent phage expression on Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilm formation // NPJ Biofilms and Microbiomes. 2021. Vol. 7. P. 22. DOI: 10.1038/s41522-021-00194-8.

9. Aonofriesei F. Surfactants’ interplay with biofilm development in Staphylococcus and Candida // Pharmaceutics. 2024. Vol. 16, no. 5. P. 657. DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics16050657.

10. Schreiberová O., Hedbávná P., Čejková A., Jirků V., Masák J. Effect of surfactants on the biofilm of Rhodococcus erythropolis, a potent degrader of aromatic pollutants // New Biotechnology. 2012. Vol. 30, no. 1. P. 62–68. DOI: 10.1016/j.nbt.2012.04.005.

11. Bjergbæk L.A., Haagensen J.A.J., Reisner A., Molin S., Roslev P. Effect of oxygen and growth medium on in vitro biofilm formation by Escherichia coli // Biofilms. 2006. Vol. 3, no. 1. P. 1–10. DOI: 10.1017/S1479050507002074.

12. Werner E., Roe F., Bugnicourt A., Franklin M.J., Heydorn A., Molin S., et al. Stratified growth in Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms // Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2004. Vol. 70, no. 10. P. 6188–6196. DOI: 10.1128/AEM.70.10.6188-6196.2004.

13. Bühler T., Ballestero S., Desai M., Brown M.R. Generation of a reproducible nutrient-depleted biofilm of Escherichia coli and Burkholderia cepacia // Journal of Applied Microbiology. 1998. Vol. 85, no. 3. P. 457–462. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2672.1998.853501.x.

14. Alotaibi G.F., Bukhari M.A. Characterization and evaluation of biofilm formation by Klebsiella pneumoniae MBB9 isolated from epilithic biofilms of the Porter Brook River, Sheffield // Edelweiss Journal of Biomedical Research and Review. 2021. Vol. 3, no. 1. P. 14–24. DOI: 10.33805/2690-2613.120.

15. Wang C., Lin Q., Yao Y., Xu R., Wu X., Meng F. Achieving simultaneous nitrification, denitrification, and phosphorus removal in pilot-scale flow-through biofilm reactor with low dissolved oxygen concentrations: performance and mechanisms // Bioresource Technology. 2022. Vol. 358. P. 127373. DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2022.127373.

16. Khudhair D.N., Hosseinzadeh M., Zwain H.M., Siadatmousavi S.M., Majdi A., Mojiri A. Upgrading the MBBR process to reduce excess sludge production in activated sludge system treating sewage // Water. 2023. Vol. 15, no. 3. P. 408. DOI: 10.3390/w15030408.

17. Silva T.P., Alves L., Paixão S.M. Effect of dibenzothiophene and its alkylated derivatives on coupled desulfurization and carotenoid production by Gordonia alkanivorans strain 1B // Journal of Environmental Management. 2020. Vol. 270. P. 110825. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110825.

18. Zhou X., Liu H., Fan X., Wang X., Bi X., Cheng L., Huang S., et al. Comparative analysis of bacterial information of biofilms and activated sludge in full-scale MBBR-IFAS systems // Microorganisms. 2024. Vol. 12, no. 6. P. 1121. DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms12061121.

19. Alisawi H.A.O. Performance of wastewater treatment during variable temperature // Applied Water Science. 2020. Vol. 10. P. 89. DOI: 10.1007/s13201-020-1171-x.

20. Maal-Bared R. Operational impacts of heavy metals on activated sludge systems: the need for improved monitoring // Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 2020. Vol. 192, no. 9. P. 560. DOI: 10.1007/s10661-020-08529-2.

21. Lu F., Huang L., Qian F., Jiang Q., Khan S., Shen P. Resistance of anaerobic activated sludge acclimated by different feeding patterns: response to different stress shocks // Water Science and Technology. 2022. Vol. 85, no. 10. P. 3023–3035. DOI: 10.2166/wst.2022.164.

22. Németh A., Ainsworth J., Ravishankar H., Lens P.N.L., Heffernan B. Temperature dependence of nitrification in a membrane-aerated biofilm reactor // Frontiers in Microbiology. 2023. Vol. 14. P. 1114647. DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1114647.

23. Li J., Xing X.-H., Wang B.-Z. Characteristics of phosphorus removal from wastewater by biofilm sequencing batch reactor (SBR) // Biochemical Engineering Journal. 2003. Vol. 16. P. 279–285.

24. Демаков В.А., Васильев Д.М., Максимова Ю.Г., Павлова Ю.А., Овечкина Г.В., Максимов А.Ю. Бактерии активного ила из сооружений биологической очистки, трансформирующие цианопиридины и амиды пиридинкарбоновых кислот // Микробиология. 2015. Т. 84. N 3. С. 369–378. DOI: 10.7868/S0026365615030039. EDN: TQQVBB.

25. Хасанова А.А., Сироткин А.С., Перушкина Е.В. Изучение способности бактерий активного ила к образованию биопленок in vitro // Известия вузов. Прикладная химия и биотехнология. 2024. Т. 14. N 2. С. 207–214. DOI: 10.21285/achb.912. EDN: PCUTZF.

26. Максимова Ю. Г., Сергеева А. А., Овечкина Г. В., Максимов А. Ю. Деградация пиридина суспензиями и биопленками штаммов Achromobacter pulmonis PNOS и Burkholderia dolosa BOS, выделенных из активного ила очистных сооружений // Биотехнология. 2020. Т. 36. N 2. С. 86–98. DOI: 10.21519/0234-2758-2020-36-286-98. EDN: IYFZFI.

27. Kumar A., Bhunia B., Dasgupta D., Mandal T., Dey A., Datta S., et al. Optimization of culture condition for growth and phenol degradation by Alcaligenes faecalis JF339228 using Taguchi methodology // Desalination and Water Treatment. 2013. Vol. 51, no. 16–18. P. 3153–3163. DOI: 10.1080/19443994.2012.749021.

28. Vandamme P., Moore E.R.B., Cnockaert M., De Brandt E., Svensson-Stadler L., Houf K., et al. Achromobacter animicus sp. nov., Achromobacter mucicolens sp. nov., Achromobacter pulmonis sp. nov. and Achromobacter spiritinus sp. nov., from human clinical samples // Systematic and Applied Microbiology. 2013. Vol. 36, no. 1. P. 1–10. DOI: 10.1016/j.syapm.2012.10.003.

29. Deng Z., Chen H., Chen S. Medium optimization for nitrogen fixer Paenibacillus sp. 1-49 // Acta Microbiologica Sinica. 2016. Vol. 56, no. 9. P. 1415–1425.

30. Suwanmanon K., Hsieh P.-C. Isolating Bacillus subtilis and optimizing its fermentative medium for GABA and nattokinase production // CyTA – Journal of Food. 2013. Vol. 12, no. 3. P. 282–290. DOI: 10.1080/19476337.2013.848472.

31. Maksimova Yu., Bykova Ya., Maksimov A. Functionalization of multi-walled carbon nanotubes changes their antibiofilm and probiofilm effects on environmental bacteria // Microorganisms. 2022. Vol. 10, no. 8. P. 1627. DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms10081627.

32. Singh P., Srivastava S., Malhotra R., Mathur P. Identification of Candida auris by PCR and assessment of biofilm formation by crystal violet assay // Indian Journal of Medical Microbiology. 2023. Vol. 46. P. 100421. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmmb.2023.100421.

33. Mathur T., Singhal S., Khan S., Upadhyay D.J., Fatma T., Rattan A. Detection of biofilm formation among the clinical isolates of Staphylococci: an evaluation of three different screening methods // Indian Journal of Medical Microbiology. 2006. Vol. 24, no. 1. P. 25–29. DOI: 10.1016/S0255-0857(21)02466-X.

34. Luzak B., Siarkiewicz P., Boncler M. An evaluation of a new high-sensitivity PrestoBlue assay for measuring cell viability and drug cytotoxicity using EA.hy926 endothelial cells // Toxicology in Vitro. 2022. Vol. 83. P. 105407. DOI: 10.1016/j.tiv.2022.105407.

35. Velkov V.V. New insights into the molecular mechanisms of evolution: stress increases genetic diversity // Molecular Biology. 2022. Vol. 36. P. 209–215. DOI: 10.1023/A:1015365805383.

36. Moreno Switt A.I., Andrus A.D., Ranieri M.L., Orsi R.H., Ivy R., den Bakker H.C., et al. Genomic comparison of sporeforming bacilli isolated from milk // BMC Genomics. 2014. Vol. 15. P. 26. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2164-15-26.

37. Asadishad B., Olsson A.L.J., Dusane D.H., Ghoshal S., Tufenkji N. Transport, motility, biofilm forming potential and survival of Bacillus subtilis exposed to cold temperature and freeze–thaw // Water Research. 2014. Vol. 58. P. 239–247. DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2014.03.048.

38. Klein W., Weber M.H.W., Marahiel M.A. Cold shock response of Bacillus subtilis: isoleucine-dependent switch in the fatty acid branching pattern for membrane adaptation to low temperatures // Journal of Bacteriology. 1999. Vol. 181, no. 17. P. 5341–5349. DOI: 10.1128/jb.181.17.5341-5349.1999.

39. Beckering C.L., Steil L., Weber M.H.W., Völker U., Marahiel M.A. Genomewide transcriptional analysis of the cold shock response in Bacillus subtilis // Journal of Bacteriology. 2002. Vol. 184, no. 22. P. 6395–6402. DOI: 10.1128/jb.184.22.6395-6402.2002.

40. Sriwiriyarat T., Nuchlek P. Effects of pH on extracellular polymeric substances compositions of biofilm in Integrated Fixed Film Activated Sludge process // International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology. 2022. Vol. 19. P. 73–84. DOI: 10.1007/s13762-021-03316-z.

41. Tahir U., Nawaz S., Khan U.H., Yasmin A. Assessment of biodecolorization potentials of biofilm forming bacteria from two different genera for Mordant Black 11 dye // Bioremediation Journal. 2021. Vol. 25, no. 3. P. 252–270. DOI: 10.1080/10889868.2021.1911920.

42. Rath S., Palit K., Das S. Variable pH and subsequent change in pCO2 modulates the biofilm formation, synthesis of extracellular polymeric substances, and survivability of a marine bacterium Bacillus stercoris GST-03 // Environmental Research. 2022. Vol. 214. P. 114128. DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2022.114128.

43. Al-Kahachi R., Al-Asadi S., Ali Z.O., Rampurawala J. Effects of genetic and environmental variables on biofilm development dynamics in Achromobacter mucicolens // Iranian Journal of Microbiology. 2023. Vol. 15, no. 3. P. 414–424. DOI: 10.18502/ijm.v15i3.12902.

44. Chakraborty I., Bhowmick G.D., Nath D., Khuman C.N., Dubey B.K., Ghangrekar M.M. Removal of sodium dodecyl sulphate from wastewater and its effect on anodic biofilm and performance of microbial fuel cell // International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation. 2021. Vol. 156. P. 105108. DOI: 10.1016/j.ibiod.2020.105108.

45. Gill S.P., Hunter W.R., Coulson L.E., Banat I.M., Schelker J. Synthetic and biological surfactant effects on freshwater biofilm community composition and metabolic activity // Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology. 2022. Vol. 106. P. 6847–6859. DOI: 10.1007/s00253-022-12179-4.

46. Fedeila M., Hachaïchi-Sadouk Z., Bautista L.F., Simarro R., Nateche F. Biodegradation of anionic surfactants by Alcaligenes faecalis, Enterobacter cloacae and Serratia marcescens strains isolated from industrial wastewater // Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety. 2018. Vol. 163. P. 629–635. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2018.07.123.

47. Sarioglu O.F., Celebioglu A., Tekinay T., Uyar T. Evaluation of contact time and fiber morphology on bacterial immobilization for development of novel surfactant degrading nanofibrous webs // RSC Advances. 2015. Vol. 5, no. 124. P. 102750–102758. DOI: 10.1039/c5ra20739h.