FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2055042860> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2055042860 endingPage "219" @default.
• W2055042860 startingPage "211" @default.
• W2055042860 abstract "AME Aquatic Microbial Ecology Contact the journal Facebook Twitter RSS Mailing List Subscribe to our mailing list via Mailchimp HomeLatest VolumeAbout the JournalEditorsSpecials AME 21:211-219 (2000) - doi:10.3354/ame021211 Role of bacterial exopolymeric capsules in protection from deposit-feeder digestion Craig J. Plante* Dept of Biology, Grice Marine Laboratory, University of Charleston, 205 Fort Johnson Road, Charleston, South Carolina 29412, USA *E-mail: plantec@cofc.edu ABSTRACT: Digestion of diverse strains of sedimentary bacteria by deposit feeders occurs at markedly disparate efficiencies, thus altering the composition of bacteria in feces and surrounding sediments. In an earlier study, I explored 2 potential mechanisms for resistance to lysis by digestive fluids of Arenicola marina (Polychaeta: Arenicolidae), cell wall ultrastructure and exopolymeric capsules. This correlative study revealed no relationship between encapsulation and lytic susceptibility across strains, whereas cell wall type (Gram-positive or -negative) was not independent of susceptibility, with Gram-positive strains always resistant. In this study, I tested the importance of capsules within strains by comparing susceptibility after manipulation of capsule quantity using 2 techniques: (1) mechanical removal of capsules, and (2) harvest of cells through various growth phases as capsule thickness changes. We found that resistant strains remained resistant regardless of capsule quantity. Two of 3 strains that normally exhibit some susceptibility to lysis, Pseudomonas atlantica and SS-1, however, increased in their susceptibility with mechanical removal of capsules. Further, capsule quantity per cell varied throughout the growth cycle for these 2 strains, and lytic susceptibility varied concomitantly during logarithmic phase, in an inverse manner. Susceptibility of the third susceptible strain, IQ-2, remained unaltered with removal of capsules. This strain also exhibited dramatic change in capsule thickness with culture age, but lytic susceptibility was positively correlated to capsule mass per cell, in marked contrast to P. atlantica and SS-1. Although capsules can reduce the susceptibility of some bacterial strains, their presence does not convey protection from digestion in all strains, nor is encapsulation the only mechanism of resistance. One common feature for all these strains was that susceptibility to lysis declined after cultures reached stationary phase. Consequently, deposit feeding may impact physiological as well as taxonomic structure of bacterial assemblages in sediments. KEY WORDS: Bacteriolysis · Capsules · Deposit feeders · Sedimentary bacteria Full text in pdf format NextExport citation RSS - Facebook - Tweet - linkedIn Cited by Published in AME Vol. 21, No. 3. Publication date: June 15, 2000 Print ISSN: 0948-3055; Online ISSN: 1616-1564 Copyright © 2000 Inter-Research." @default.
• W2055042860 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2055042860 creator A5073205899 @default.
• W2055042860 date "2000-01-01" @default.
• W2055042860 modified "2023-10-16" @default.
• W2055042860 title "Role of bacterial exopolymeric capsules in protection from deposit-feeder digestion" @default.
• W2055042860 cites W1974259849 @default.
• W2055042860 doi "https://doi.org/10.3354/ame021211" @default.
• W2055042860 hasPublicationYear "2000" @default.
• W2055042860 type Work @default.
• W2055042860 sameAs 2055042860 @default.
• W2055042860 citedByCount "24" @default.
• W2055042860 countsByYear W20550428602012 @default.
• W2055042860 countsByYear W20550428602015 @default.
• W2055042860 countsByYear W20550428602017 @default.
• W2055042860 countsByYear W20550428602019 @default.
• W2055042860 countsByYear W20550428602020 @default.
• W2055042860 countsByYear W20550428602021 @default.
• W2055042860 countsByYear W20550428602022 @default.
• W2055042860 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2055042860 hasAuthorship W2055042860A5073205899 @default.
• W2055042860 hasBestOaLocation W20550428601 @default.
• W2055042860 hasConcept C153911025 @default.
• W2055042860 hasConcept C2778778583 @default.
• W2055042860 hasConcept C523546767 @default.
• W2055042860 hasConcept C54355233 @default.
• W2055042860 hasConcept C57409179 @default.
• W2055042860 hasConcept C59822182 @default.
• W2055042860 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2055042860 hasConcept C89423630 @default.
• W2055042860 hasConceptScore W2055042860C153911025 @default.
• W2055042860 hasConceptScore W2055042860C2778778583 @default.
• W2055042860 hasConceptScore W2055042860C523546767 @default.
• W2055042860 hasConceptScore W2055042860C54355233 @default.
• W2055042860 hasConceptScore W2055042860C57409179 @default.
• W2055042860 hasConceptScore W2055042860C59822182 @default.
• W2055042860 hasConceptScore W2055042860C86803240 @default.
• W2055042860 hasConceptScore W2055042860C89423630 @default.
• W2055042860 hasLocation W20550428601 @default.
• W2055042860 hasOpenAccess W2055042860 @default.
• W2055042860 hasPrimaryLocation W20550428601 @default.
• W2055042860 hasRelatedWork W1966505020 @default.
• W2055042860 hasRelatedWork W1977415958 @default.
• W2055042860 hasRelatedWork W2019247955 @default.
• W2055042860 hasRelatedWork W2049032209 @default.
• W2055042860 hasRelatedWork W2054144154 @default.
• W2055042860 hasRelatedWork W2057351508 @default.
• W2055042860 hasRelatedWork W2084312473 @default.
• W2055042860 hasRelatedWork W2332237872 @default.
• W2055042860 hasRelatedWork W2390777514 @default.
• W2055042860 hasRelatedWork W4251051526 @default.
• W2055042860 hasVolume "21" @default.
• W2055042860 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2055042860 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2055042860 magId "2055042860" @default.
• W2055042860 workType "article" @default.