Journal Browser
Journal Insights

Frequency: Half-yearly                    

Time to first decision: 2.4 Weeks

Submission to publication: 4 Weeks        

Acceptance rate: 26%

ISSN:  2972-3418

Open Access Review

Advances in rapid detection of Pseudomonas aeruginosa with DNase-based sensors

by Shriya Madan a orcid  and  Yongzhi Chen b,* orcid
a
Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, USA
b
Department of Medicine, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
BAB  2023, 11; 2(2), 11; https://doi.org/10.58567/bab02020002
Received: 27 September 2023 / Accepted: 16 October 2023 / Published: 17 October 2023

Abstract

Pseudomonas aeruginosa is a common pathogen, and its presence in medical environments and water bodies has attracted widespread attention. Traditional detection methods are usually time-consuming and cumbersome, so it is necessary to develop a rapid and sensitive detection technology. DNase can specifically recognize and cut DNA molecules complementary to its substrate sequence. The researchers took advantage of this property to design various DNase-based sensors for detecting the presence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. These sensors usually use DNase as a recognition element to identify target strains by hybridizing with specific DNA sequences. When the target strain is present, DNase is activated and begins to catalyze the cleavage reaction, producing a detectable signal. This DNase-based sensor has the advantages of rapidity, high sensitivity, and high specificity. In addition, the researchers also explored combining DNase with nanomaterials, fluorescent dyes, etc. to further improve the performance of the sensor. These improvements have improved the detection ability of the sensor in complex samples, laying the foundation for practical applications. With the continuous improvement of technology, these sensors are expected to be widely used in medical, environmental monitoring and other fields, and provide more efficient and convenient solutions for bacterial detection. This study reviewed the research progress of DNase-based sensors for the rapid detection of Pseudomonas aeruginosa.


Copyright: © 2023 by Madan and Chen. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) (Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
Show Figures

Share and Cite

ACS Style
Madan, S.; Chen, Y. Advances in rapid detection of Pseudomonas aeruginosa with DNase-based sensors. Biomaterials and Biosensors, 2023, 2, 11. https://doi.org/10.58567/bab02020002
AMA Style
Madan S, Chen Y. Advances in rapid detection of Pseudomonas aeruginosa with DNase-based sensors. Biomaterials and Biosensors; 2023, 2(2):11. https://doi.org/10.58567/bab02020002
Chicago/Turabian Style
Madan, Shriya; Chen, Yongzhi 2023. "Advances in rapid detection of Pseudomonas aeruginosa with DNase-based sensors" Biomaterials and Biosensors 2, no.2:11. https://doi.org/10.58567/bab02020002
APA style
Madan, S., & Chen, Y. (2023). Advances in rapid detection of Pseudomonas aeruginosa with DNase-based sensors. Biomaterials and Biosensors, 2(2), 11. https://doi.org/10.58567/bab02020002

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

References

  1. Islan GA, Ruiz ME, Morales JF, et al. (2017). Hybrid inhalable microparticles for dual controlled release of levofloxacin and DNase: physicochemical characterization and in vivo targeted delivery to the lungs. J Mater Chem B 5, 3132-3144. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6TB03366K
  2. Belfield K, Bayston R, Hajduk N, et al. (2017). Evaluation of combinations of putative anti-biofilm agents and antibiotics to eradicate biofilms of Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Antimicrob Chemother 72, 2531-2538. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkx192
  3. Aleanizy FS, Alqahtani FY, Eltayb EK, et al. (2021). Evaluating the effect of antibiotics sub-inhibitory dose on Pseudomonas aeruginosa quorum sensing dependent virulence and its phenotypes. Saudi J Biol Sci 28, 550-559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2020.10.040
  4. Nair A, Perry A, Perry JD, et al. (2020). In vitro effects of combined iron chelation, antibiotics and matrix disruption on clinical isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Antimicrob Chemother 75, 586-592. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkz505
  5. Chen Y, Mei Y, Zhao X, et al. (2020). Reagents-Loaded, Automated Assay that Integrates Recombinase-Aided Amplification and Cas12a Nucleic Acid Detection for a Point-of-Care Test. Anal Chem 92, 14846-14852. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.0c03883
  6. Atack JM, Guo C, Yang L, et al. (2020). DNA sequence repeats identify numerous Type I restriction-modification systems that are potential epigenetic regulators controlling phase-variable regulons, phasevarions. Faseb j 34, 1038-1051. https://doi.org/10.1096/fj.201901536RR
  7. Kyung Lee M, Armstrong DA, Hazlett HF, et al. (2021). Exposure to extracellular vesicles from Pseudomonas aeruginosa result in loss of DNA methylation at enhancer and DNase hypersensitive site regions in lung macrophages. Epigenetics 16, 1187-1200. https://doi.org/10.1080/15592294.2020.1853318
  8. Hu Y, He Y, Lin Z. (2020). Biochemical and structural characterization of the Holliday junction resolvase RuvC from Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 525, 265-271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2020.02.062
  9. Fanaei Pirlar R, Emaneini M, Beigverdi R, et al. (2020). Combinatorial effects of antibiotics and enzymes against dual-species Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms in the wound-like medium. PLoS One 15, e0235093. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0235093
  10. Azzouz L, Cherry A, Riedl M, et al. (2018). Relative antibacterial functions of complement and NETs: NETs trap and complement effectively kills bacteria. Mol Immunol 97, 71-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molimm.2018.02.019
  11. Hojjati M, Behabahani BA, Falah F. (2020). Aggregation, adherence, anti-adhesion and antagonistic activity properties relating to surface charge of probiotic Lactobacillus brevis gp104 against Staphylococcus aureus. Microb Pathog 147, 104420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micpath.2020.104420
  12. Kumara SS, Bashisht A, Venkateswaran G, et al. (2019). Characterization of Novel Lactobacillus fermentum from Curd Samples of Indigenous Cows from Malnad Region, Karnataka, for their Aflatoxin B(1) Binding and Probiotic Properties. Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins 11, 1100-1109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-018-9479-7
  13. Jin H, Roy U, Lee G, et al. (2018). Structural mechanism of DNA interstrand cross-link unhooking by the bacterial FAN1 nuclease. J Biol Chem 293, 6482-6496. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.RA118.002171
  14. Rastogi S, Mittal V, Singh A. (2021). Selection of Potential Probiotic Bacteria from Exclusively Breastfed Infant Faeces with Antagonistic Activity Against Multidrug-Resistant ESKAPE Pathogens. Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins 13, 739-750. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-020-09724-w
  15. Ricci A, Coppo E, Barbieri R, et al. (2017). The effect of sub-inhibitory concentrations of rifaximin on urease production and on other virulence factors expressed by Klebsiella pneumoniae, Proteus mirabilis, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus. J Chemother 29, 67-73. https://doi.org/10.1080/1120009X.2016.1195069
  16. Bhongir RK, Kasetty G, Papareddy P, et al. (2017). DNA-fragmentation is a source of bactericidal activity against Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Biochem J 474, 411-425. https://doi.org/10.1042/BCJ20160706
  17. Niazi M, Florio TJ, Yang R, et al. (2020). Biophysical analysis of Pseudomonas-phage PaP3 small terminase suggests a mechanism for sequence-specific DNA-binding by lateral interdigitation. Nucleic Acids Res 48, 11721-11736. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkaa866
  18. Kim S, Kim SH, Ahn J, et al. (2019). Crystal Structure of the Regulatory Domain of MexT, a Transcriptional Activator of the MexEFOprN Efflux Pump in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Mol Cells 42, 850-857. https://doi.org/10.14348/molcells.2019.0168
  19. Patel KK, Surekha DB, Tripathi M, et al. (2019). Antibiofilm Potential of Silver Sulfadiazine-Loaded Nanoparticle Formulations: A Study on the Effect of DNase-I on Microbial Biofilm and Wound Healing Activity. Mol Pharm 16, 3916-3925. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.9b00527
  20. Reyneke B, Ndlovu T, Khan S, et al. (2017). Comparison of EMA-, PMA- and DNase qPCR for the determination of microbial cell viability. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 101, 7371-7383. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-017-8471-6
  21. Baraquet C, Harwood CS. (2017). Use of Nonradiochemical DNAse Footprinting to Analyze c-di-GMP Modulation of DNA-Binding Proteins. Methods Mol Biol 1657, 303-315. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-7240-1_24
  22. Liu X, Zhang L, Xiu Y, et al. (2021). Insights into the dual functions of AcrIF14 during the inhibition of type I-F CRISPR-Cas surveillance complex. Nucleic Acids Res 49, 10178-10191. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkab738
  23. Shahri FN, Izanloo A, Goharrizi M, et al. (2022). Antimicrobial resistance, virulence factors, and genotypes of Pseudomonas aeruginosa clinical isolates from Gorgan, northern Iran. Int Microbiol 25, 709-721. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10123-022-00256-7
  24. Johnston EL, Zavan L, Bitto NJ, et al. (2023). Planktonic and Biofilm-Derived Pseudomonas aeruginosa Outer Membrane Vesicles Facilitate Horizontal Gene Transfer of Plasmid DNA. Microbiol Spectr 11, e0517922. https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.05179-22
  25. Costa KC, Glasser NR, Conway SJ, et al. (2017). Pyocyanin degradation by a tautomerizing demethylase inhibits Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms. Science 355, 170-173. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aag3180