ライフサイエンスコーパス: bacterial adhesion

1 lates EGFR- and MUC1-dependent signaling and bacterial adhesion.

2 magglutination (HA) functional cell assay of bacterial adhesion.

3 with a role of mucin O-glycans in preventing bacterial adhesion.

4 uired for Fap1 biogenesis and Fap1-dependent bacterial adhesion.

5 strating the role of the Fap1 polypeptide in bacterial adhesion.

6 that is capable of mediating shear-enhanced bacterial adhesion.

7 ression as detected by antibody staining and bacterial adhesion.

8 y important roles in governing leukocyte and bacterial adhesion.

9 epithelium, may be responsible for increased bacterial adhesion.

10 ation is required for fimbria biogenesis and bacterial adhesion.

11 did not affect Fap1, fimbrial expression or bacterial adhesion.

12 nst adhesin fragments in attempts to inhibit bacterial adhesion.

13 he design of materials that are resistant to bacterial adhesion.

14 t with intimate attaching and effacing (A/E) bacterial adhesion.

15 o bacteria yielded significant reductions in bacterial adhesion.

16 -1 distribution on AD-affected skin enhances bacterial adhesion.

17 red the role of corneal nerves in preventing bacterial adhesion.

18 or for H. pylori catalase and contributes to bacterial adhesion.

19 ylated derivatives of this N-glycan impaired bacterial adhesion.

20 iciencies of up to 80% at the early stage of bacterial adhesion.

21 ntimicrobial surfaces that prevent long-term bacterial adhesion.

22 ating the advantage of paper-based anode for bacterial adhesion.

23 wer the SFE difference, the higher degree of bacterial adhesion.

24 ynamic measure for quantitatively predicting bacterial adhesion.

25 phy, and stiffness of substratum material on bacterial adhesion.

26 all or assemble fiber-like pili that promote bacterial adhesion.

27 type IVb pilus group, which can function in bacterial adhesion.

28 e vasculature, capture of nanoparticles, and bacterial adhesion.

29 tion (1.5-fold) and diminished MUC1-mediated bacterial adhesion (38-56%) and signaling (73%).

30 for neutrophil L-selectin and receptors for bacterial adhesion, a finding with interesting implicati

31 inosa challenge, previously shown to counter bacterial adhesion, also depended on TRPA1/TRPV1 and sen

32 15 proteins that were up-regulated following bacterial adhesion and 30 proteins that were down-regula

33 ed adhesin, EtpA, resulting in modulation of bacterial adhesion and accelerated delivery of the heat-

34 Furthermore, the BapA1-mediated bacterial adhesion and biofilm formation are independent

35 lum, and most of these mutations also affect bacterial adhesion and biofilm formation by Yersinia spe

36 The LINORel combination greatly reduces bacterial adhesion and biofilm formation of two most com

37 n the paper have implications in controlling bacterial adhesion and biofilm formation on solid surfac

38 ptococci and staphylococci are important for bacterial adhesion and biofilm formation.

39 ts potent antimicrobial properties, to deter bacterial adhesion and biofilm formation.

40 tive or implant materials) for prevention of bacterial adhesion and biofilm formation.

41 eptococcus parasanguinis and is required for bacterial adhesion and biofilm formation.

42 wer in these mutant strains, suggesting that bacterial adhesion and cellulose solubilization are inex

43 These results indicate that, by facilitating bacterial adhesion and cytosolic invasion, CLA-1 and CLA

44 EsaI/EsaR QS system, is required for proper bacterial adhesion and development of spatially defined,

45 nfection insert (DCDI) that can both prevent bacterial adhesion and disinfect indwelling catheters in

46 This study demonstrated that bacterial adhesion and electron collection should be opt

47 hts into the calcium-dependent regulation of bacterial adhesion and folding, suggesting possible ther

48 e rapid screening of potential inhibitors of bacterial adhesion and for the quantitative evaluation o

49 s of epithelial cell glycocalyces, prevented bacterial adhesion and growth.

50 ability, and flexibility required to sustain bacterial adhesion and incite intestinal disease.

51 Inhibition of Epac1 suppresses bacterial adhesion and invasion.

52 Differentiation-induced changes in bacterial adhesion and killing capacity underlie the tro

53 Glycosylation of SRRPs is important for bacterial adhesion and pathogenesis.

54 hitecture, and localization, contributing to bacterial adhesion and potentially pathogenicity.

55 that actively elute antimicrobials to avert bacterial adhesion and promote killing; and 3) surfaces

56 Among the numerous strategies to prevent bacterial adhesion and subsequent biofilm formation, sur

57 eases bacterial hydrophobicity, and promotes bacterial adhesion and subsequent biofilm formation.

58 m of this study was to compare in vitro oral bacterial adhesion and subsequent surface degradation on

59 termed Green coatings, reduced Gram-positive bacterial adhesion and supported mammalian cell spreadin

60 The bacterial adhesion and the biofilm thickness were consid

61 Bacterial adhesion and the subsequent formation of biofi

62 c ablation of cell surface sulfation reduces bacterial adhesion and thereby alters the kinetics of T3

63 itted polyelectrolyte coatings to facilitate bacterial adhesion and thus enhance the sensitivity of b

64 that deletion of this CEACAM abrogates both bacterial adhesion and toxin delivery.

65 We further observed that COMP reduces bacterial adhesion and uptake by human lung epithelial c

66 To test the role of microvilli in bacterial adhesion and uptake, we developed polarized in

67 To assess in vitro bacterial adhesion and viability after liquid perfluoroc

68 resistant to nonspecific protein adsorption, bacterial adhesion, and biofilm formation.

69 microbial resistance, heavy metal transport, bacterial adhesion, and extracytoplasmic substrate traff

70 bioinspired surface roughness, wettability, bacterial adhesion, and mechanical properties and valida

71 rstanding of phage evolution, phage-mediated bacterial adhesion, and pathogenicity.

72 rgeting pilus biogenesis, thereby inhibiting bacterial adhesion, and paves the way for a novel therap

73 ycoprotein-rich salivary fluids that enhance bacterial adhesion, and propagation, and biofilm formati

74 bust, preexisting host cell heterogeneity in bacterial adhesion, and we find no evidence for signific

75 d optimization of potent small-molecule FimH bacterial adhesion antagonists based on alpha-d-mannose

76 motility is a critical factor in determining bacterial adhesion, as long as the aquatic chemical cond

77 pramolecular structures for cell, virus, and bacterial adhesion, as well as biomaterial and biodevice

78 -2, ATCC, Rockville, MD) cells were used for bacterial adhesion assays.

79 The intimate bacterial adhesion associated with A/E lesion formation

80 a novel type IV secretion system involved in bacterial adhesion; (b) the newly discovered toxin, cyto

81 ich quantitatively explains the reduction of bacterial adhesion based on the extended Derjaguin, Land

82 ) from C. difficile R20291 to be involved in bacterial adhesion based on the Vaxign reverse vaccinolo

83 n energy are often elusive in predicting the bacterial adhesion behavior.

84 provides an alternative explanation for the bacterial adhesion behavior.

85 Bacterial adhesion behaviour included enterotoxigenic Es

86 lost shear-enhanced binding properties, with bacterial adhesion being inhibited by shear forces and l

87 Fluid flow is thought to prevent bacterial adhesion, but some bacteria use adhesins with

88 Sortase A is involved in the process of bacterial adhesion by anchoring LPXTG-containing protein

89 Bacterial adhesion can be controlled by applying electri

90 shi et al. and Sano et al. shed light on how bacterial adhesion can cue intestinal epithelial cells t

91 ential to repel organic foulants and inhibit bacterial adhesion can effectively reduce the frequency

92 dded in an extracellular matrix that affords bacterial adhesion-cohesion and drug tolerance, making t

93 othesized that zirconia might have a reduced bacterial adhesion compared with titanium; however, resu

94 ective immune response, involvement of TF in bacterial adhesion, conservation of the protein among pn

95 We hypothesized that mechanical forces in bacterial adhesion could regulate thioester reactivity t

96 en-mucin interaction is significant and that bacterial adhesion differ non-linearly with flow rates a

97 pidly fluctuating, nongenetic variability in bacterial adhesion diversifies susceptibility to infecti

98 ovided evidence for the relationship between bacterial adhesion dynamics and viability, as well as th

99 However, many studies on bacterial adhesion either neglect the influence of shear

100 Glycans mediate bacterial adhesion events involved in colonisation and i

101 ophilic polydopamine (PDA) coatings decrease bacterial adhesion forces at short bacterium-membrane co

102 to bacteria, and increased susceptibility to bacterial adhesion (>3-fold), the epithelium remained re

103 Examination of bacterial adhesion has been difficult both because it is

104 on, the North American cranberry, to prevent bacterial adhesion has been used to advantage in the pre

105 vels of Rac1 self-association at the site of bacterial adhesion in a PBR-dependent fashion.

106 ves and TRPA1/TRPV1 in corneal resistance to bacterial adhesion in vivo and suggest that the mechanis

107 es in order to monitor the peptide effect as bacterial adhesion inhibitor, thanks to the carrier/conc

108 Bacterial adhesion interference and the susceptibility o

109 on on host Hsp60 expression and LAP-mediated bacterial adhesion, invasion, and transepithelial transl

110 Bacterial adhesion is a fundamental process which enable

111 Bacterial adhesion is an important initial step in biofi

112 Insight into the mechanisms underlying bacterial adhesion is critical to the formulation of mem

113 pression of flagellar genes is repressed and bacterial adhesion is enhanced.

114 The initial step in bacterial adhesion is the interaction of cells with a su

115 , which we term living assembled material by bacterial adhesion (LAMBA).

116 ial for sialic acid binding did not decrease bacterial adhesion, leaving the precise mechanism of Fap

117 testinal epithelial cells and contributes to bacterial adhesion, LT delivery, and colonization of the

118 In order to minimize bacterial adhesion, material surface modifications are c

119 This makes bacterial adhesion mechanistically comparable with the i

120 ral variations often result in variations in bacterial adhesion mediated by pili.

121 vent is mediated, in part, by binding of the bacterial adhesion molecule intimin to a second bacteria

122 Intimin is a bacterial adhesion molecule involved in intimate attachm

123 ce factor Fimbrial Adhesion (papG gene), the bacterial adhesion molecule.

124 Although many bacterial adhesion molecules from these uropathogens hav

125 Neither fluorescein staining nor bacterial adhesion necessarily predict or enable corneal

126 protein and carboxyl groups, indicating that bacterial adhesion occurring over longer time scales is

127 ay, the presence of purified rHagB decreased bacterial adhesion of P. gingivalis or E. coli-HagB to H

128 rylation of proteins adjacent to the site of bacterial adhesion on host gastric epithelial cells.

129 Good bacterial adhesion on the spiral anode is clearly shown

130 utans produces exopolysaccharides to enhance bacterial adhesion on the tooth surface; subsequent lact

131 Bacterial adhesion onto mineral surfaces and subsequent

132 Bacterial adhesion onto solid surfaces is of importance

133 ivity in human-derived cells enhanced either bacterial adhesion or adhesion and entry in an InlF-inde

134 Polymers that can interfere with bacterial adhesion or the chemical reactions used for qu

135 caused concentration-dependent reductions in bacterial adhesion (P < 0.007 and P < 0.02, respectively

136 Furthermore, the bacterial adhesion phenotype correlates with the ability

137 Our results imply that bacterial adhesion, rather than invasion or release of a

138 t LGG-mediated signaling in the ENS requires bacterial adhesion, redox mechanisms, and FPR1.

139 Impacts on bacterial adhesion, resident immune cells, and epithelia

140 l cells and the MZO(nano) during the initial bacterial adhesion stage.

141 Bacterial adhesion studies using Staphylococcus epidermi

142 during biofilm formation, including initial bacterial adhesion, subsequent development, and final ma

143 ography, usually at the nanoscale, decreases bacterial adhesion sufficiently to retard establishment

144 s of Fap1 biogenesis, fimbrial assembly, and bacterial adhesion, suggesting that the three proteins i

145 separation distances where the irreversible bacterial adhesion takes place can be determined relativ

146 rface becomes a notorious culprit, fostering bacterial adhesion that might lead to progressive loss o

147 o describe my journey through science: first bacterial adhesion, then cytokine function, and then imm

148 same ex vivo fluids competitively inhibited bacterial adhesion to airway epithelia, and MUC1-ED immu

149 Consequently, bacterial adhesion to an in vitro tooth model was also r

150 the deletions and the parental wild type for bacterial adhesion to and internalization by HEp-2 cells

151 ent factor C3, might partially contribute to bacterial adhesion to and invasion of epithelial cells.

152 its activity to be associated with increased bacterial adhesion to and invasion of respiratory epithe

153 Bacterial adhesion to and subsequent colonization of sur

154 Also, whereas bacterial adhesion to bladder epithelial cells was prese

155 ilm or human plaque samples were applied for bacterial adhesion to each type of disk, which after 72

156 or that contributes to virulence by reducing bacterial adhesion to EPC cells and facilitating intrace

157 EseJ inhibits bacterial adhesion to EPC cells from within bacterial ce

158 clonal antibodies that blocked FimH-mediated bacterial adhesion to epithelial cells and urinary bladd

159 , F1 inhibits bacterial uptake by inhibiting bacterial adhesion to epithelial cells, whereas Psa seem

160 Instead, invasion increased due to increased bacterial adhesion to epithelial monolayers with comprom

161 Notably, bacterial adhesion to fibrinogen and fibrinogen binding

162 in A (DbpA) of Borrelia burgdorferi mediates bacterial adhesion to heparin and dermatan sulfate assoc

163 ion and virulence factor secretion, impeding bacterial adhesion to host cells and biofilm formation,

164 Due to its extracellular lifestyle, bacterial adhesion to host cells constitutes an attracti

165 ctive entry is not associated with increased bacterial adhesion to host cells or with morphological c

166 ance colonization and infection by mediating bacterial adhesion to host cells, invasion across endoth

167 n shown that this interaction contributes to bacterial adhesion to host cells, invasion of host tissu

168 nce factors that aid in disease-by promoting bacterial adhesion to host cells, subsequent invasion of

169 tial of pks(+) E. coli critically depends on bacterial adhesion to host epithelial cells, mediated by

170 irect evidence to support a central role for bacterial adhesion to host gastric epithelial Lewis anti

171 Bacterial adhesion to host receptors is an early and ess

172 MDX also increased bacterial adhesion to human intestinal epithelial cell m

173 eed, rTF and an anti-rTF antiserum inhibited bacterial adhesion to human lung derived epithelial cell

174 region were the most effective at inhibiting bacterial adhesion to immobilized fibrinogen, although a

175 mphocytes, synapse formation in neurons, and bacterial adhesion to intestinal epithelial cells.

176 c force microscopy showed that SdrF mediates bacterial adhesion to keratin 10 through strong and weak

177 Msp2s of A. phagocytophilum are involved in bacterial adhesion to ligands on host myeloid cells befo

178 the presence of antibodies, the strength of bacterial adhesion to mannose is increased similar to th

179 ever, molecular mechanisms mediating initial bacterial adhesion to morphologically intact endocardium

180 Furthermore, filamentous phage promoted bacterial adhesion to mucin and inhibited bacterial inva

181 amage and death during the initial phases of bacterial adhesion to NF membranes and raises a key ques

182 ppear to generally play an important role in bacterial adhesion to pIgR.

183 Bacterial adhesion to platelets is mediated via a range

184 All viruses enhanced bacterial adhesion to primary and immortalized cell line

185 Respiratory viruses promote bacterial adhesion to respiratory epithelial cells, a pr

186 resulted in a significant inhibition of the bacterial adhesion to saliva-conditioned hydroxyapatite.

187 h co-ordinates glycoside hydrolase assembly, bacterial adhesion to substrate and polysaccharide hydro

188 Bacterial adhesion to surfaces occurs ubiquitously and i

189 genesis of Flp pili, which are necessary for bacterial adhesion to surfaces, biofilm formation, and p

190 trostatic interactions and therefore inhibit bacterial adhesion to surfaces, induce the expression of

191 st step during colonization and infection is bacterial adhesion to the cornified envelope of corneocy

192 xtracellular lectin LecB plays a key role in bacterial adhesion to the host and biofilm formation.

193 Anti-adhesion therapies interfere with the bacterial adhesion to the host and thus avoid direct dis

194 cells, indicating that TF contributes to the bacterial adhesion to the host.

195 Intimate bacterial adhesion to the intestinal epithelium is a pat

196 ortantly, interrupting segmented filamentous bacterial adhesion to the intestinal epithelium.

197 some types of infection because they reduce bacterial adhesion to the respiratory epithelial cell su

198 meric autotransporter subfamily and mediates bacterial adhesion to the respiratory epithelium.

199 evers' beating prevents the initial stage of bacterial adhesion to the substrate surface and the subs

200 e onset of pillar deformation in response to bacterial adhesion to the surface.

201 lets and von Willebrand factor (VWF) mediate bacterial adhesion to the vessel wall and the cardiac va

202 ogenic infections, as evidenced by increased bacterial adhesion to their skin and reduced levels of t

203 sylated ligands and increased by severalfold bacterial adhesion to urothelial cells.

204 ts with the tips of ETEC flagella to promote bacterial adhesion, toxin delivery, and intestinal colon

205 Bacterial adhesion triggered the transient recruitment o

206 ssed on the bacterial surface, and decreased bacterial adhesion under flow conditions.

207 Blocking bacterial adhesion using a pharmacological FimH inhibito

208 Bacterial adhesion was associated with pathogen phagocyt

209 We found that bacterial adhesion was unambiguously mediated by the SFE

210 of mannoside-presenting SAMs, inhibitors of bacterial adhesion were easily screened by observing the

211 Short- and long-range force components of bacterial adhesion were obtained by Poisson analysis of

212 gens suggests a potential common pattern for bacterial adhesion, whereas participation of conserved r

213 Perflubron and FC-77 appear to decrease bacterial adhesion, whereas Rimar does not.

214 discs (N = 18) were exposed in vitro to new bacterial adhesion with Streptococcus sanguinis.

215 can be used to analyze the initial events in bacterial adhesion with unprecedented resolution.