Effects of Different Nanoparticles on Microbes

Abstract

Nanoparticles widely exist in nature and may be formed through inorganic or organic pathways, exhibiting unique physical and chemical properties different from those of bulk materials. However, little is known about the potential consequences of nanomaterials on microbes in natural environments. Herein, we investigated the interactions between microbes and nanoparticles by performing experiments on the inhibition effects of gold, ludox and laponite nanoparticles on Escherichia coli in liquid Luria–Bertani (LB) medium at different nanoparticle concentrations. These nanoparticles were shown to be effective bactericides. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images revealed the distinct aggregation of cells and nanoparticles. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) images showed considerable cell membrane disruption due to nanoparticle accumulation on the cell surfaces, resulting in cell death. We hypothesized that this nanoparticle accumulation on the cell surfaces not only disrupted the cell membranes but also physically blocked the microbes from accessing nutrients. An iron-reducing bacterium, Shewanella putrefaciens, was tested for its ability to reduce the Fe (III) in solid ferrihydrite (HFO) or aqueous ferric citrate in the presence of laponite nanoparticles. It was found that the laponite nanoparticles inhibited the reduction of the Fe (III) in solid ferrihydrite. Moreover, direct contact between the cells and solid Fe (III) coated with the laponite nanoparticles was physically blocked, as confirmed by SEM images and particle size measurements. However, the laponite particles had an insignificant effect on the extent of aqueous Fe (III) bioreduction but slightly enhanced the rate of bioreduction of the Fe (III) in aqueous ferric citrate. The slightly increased rate of bioreduction by laponite nanoparticles may be due to the removal of inhibitory Fe (II) from the cell surface by its sorption onto the laponite nanoparticle surface. This result indicates that the scavenging of toxic heavy metals, such as Fe (II), by nanoparticles may be beneficial for microbes in the environment. On the other hand, microbial cells are also capable of detoxifying nanoparticles by coagulating nanoparticles with extracellular polymeric substances or by changing nanoparticle morphologies. Hence, the interactions between microbes and nanoparticles in natural environments should receive more attention.

Comparative Study of Callistemon citrinus (Bottlebrush) and Punica granatum (Pomegranate) Extracts for Sustainable Synthesis of Silver Nanoparticles and Their Oral Antimicrobial Efficacy

“…The differences in the antimicrobial activity of nanoparticles across different microbes are well-documented in the literature. Differences depend on the microbe and the activity of the nanoparticles, among other factors [ 97 , 98 ]. An interaction without significant differences is reflected in Table 3 with Ag-PPE_ SA and with Ag-BBE_ CA in Table 2 .…”

Do silver-chitosan nanocomposites promote bacterial resistance to silver or common antibiotics?

“…Assumingly, the chitosan moiety brings chitosan-silver nanocomposites close to bacteria, allowing intimate contact between the bacterial cell surface and antimicrobial materials – chitosan and silver – to enhance their antibacterial action. Moreover, it has been demonstrated that NPs may induce cell aggregation due to cell membrane disruption or through the induction of stress response and the production of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS), which leads to the assembly of cells [51].…”

Nanomaterials in plant management: functions, mechanisms and prospects

“…214 and it has also been reported that microbial cells are able to detoxify NPs by coagulating NPs with extracellular polymeric substances or by changing nanoparticle morphologies. 215 Hence, the interactions between microorganisms and nanoparticles in the natural environment should receive more attention.…”