International Journal of Oral Biology

The Korean Academy of Oral Biology (대한구강생물학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of LIVE/DEAD$^{(R)}$ BacLight$^{TM}$ Bacterial Viability Test and alamarBlue$^{(R)}$ Method for Enumeration of Live and Dead Bacteria for Oral Bacterial Species

  • Kim, Yeon-Hee (Department of Oral Microbiology, College of Dentistry, Research Institute of Oral Science, Gangneung-Wonju National University) ;
  • Lee, Si Young (Department of Oral Microbiology, College of Dentistry, Research Institute of Oral Science, Gangneung-Wonju National University)
  • Received : 2012.11.21
  • Accepted : 2012.12.12
  • Published : 2012.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

LIVE/DEAD$^{(R)}$ BacLight$^{TM}$ and alamarBlue$^{(R)}$ are fluorescent materials used for the enumeration of live and dead bacteria. LIVE/DEAD$^{(R)}$ BacLight$^{TM}$ is generally used for confocal microscopy applications to differentiate live from dead bacteria in a biofilm or planktonic state. AlamarBlue$^{(R)}$ has also been used widely to assay live and dead bacteria in a planktonic state. Whilst these materials are successfully utilized in experiments to discriminate live from dead bacteria for several species of bacteria, the application of these techniques to oral bacteria is limited to the use of LIVE/DEAD$^{(R)}$ BacLight$^{TM}$ in biofilm studies. In our present study, we assessed whether these two methods could enumerate live and dead oral bacterial species in a planktonic state. We tested the reagents on Streptococcus mutans, Streptococcus sobrinus, Porphyromonas gingivalis, Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans and Enterococcus faecalis and found that only LIVE/DEAD$^{(R)}$ BacLight$^{TM}$ could differentiate live from dead cells for all five of these oral strains. AlamarBlue$^{(R)}$ was not effective in this regard for P. gingivalis or A. actinomycetemcomitans. In addition, the differentiation of live and dead bacterial cells by alamarBlue$^{(R)}$ could not be performed for concentrations lower than $2{\times}10^6$ cells/ml. Our data thus indicate that LIVE/DEAD$^{(R)}$ BacLight$^{TM}$ is a more effective reagent for this analysis.

Keywords

References

  1. Boulos L, Prevost M, Barbeau B, Coallier J, Desjardins R. LIVE/DEAD BacLight : Application of a new rapid staining method for direct enumeration of viable and total bacteria in drinking water. J Microbiol Methods. 1999;37: 77-86.
  2. Lu W, Wang Y, Zhang XJ. Methods of enumeration of bacteria in drinking water. Huan Jing Ke Xue. 2004;25:167-9.
  3. Chavez de Paz LE, Resin A, Howard KA, Sutherland DS, Wejse PL. Antimicrobial effect of chitosan nanoparticles on Streptococcus mutans biofilms. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2011;77:3892-5.
  4. Stocks SM. Mechanism and use of the commercially available viability stain, BacLight. Cytometry A. 2004;61: 189-95.
  5. Biggerstaff JP, Le Puil M, Weidow BL, Prater J, Glass K, Radosevich M. et al. New methodology for viability testing in environmental samples. Mol Cell Probes. 2006;20: 141-6.
  6. Chavez de Paz LE, Bergenholtz G, Dahlen G, Svensater G. Response to alkaline stress by root canal bacteria in biofilms. Int Endod J. 2007;40:344-55.
  7. Welin-Neilands J, Svensater G. Acid tolerance of biofilm cells of Streptococcus mutans. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007; 73:5633-8.
  8. Collins TL, Markus EA, Hassett DJ, Robinson JB. The effect of a cationic porphyrin on Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms. Curr Microbiol. 2010;61:411-6.
  9. alamarBlue® cell viability reagent product information. 2008. (http://products.invitrogen.com/ivgn/product/DAL1025? ICID= search-dal1025)
  10. DeForge LE, Billeci KL, Kramer SM. Effect of IFN-gamma on the killing of Staphlyococcus aureus in human whole blood. assessment of bacterial viability by CFU determination and by a new method using alamarBlue. J Immunol Methods. 2000;245:79-89.
  11. Carroll J, Douarre P, Coffey A, Buckley J, Cashman B, O' Farrell K. et al. Optimization of a rapid viability assay for mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis by using alamarBlue. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2009;75:7870-2.
  12. Giao MS, Wilks SA, Azevedo NF, Vieira MJ, Keevil CW. Validation of SYTO 9/propidium iodide uptake for rapid detection of viable but noncultivable Legionella pneumophila. Microb Ecol. 2009;58:56-62.
  13. Alakomi HL, Matto J, Virkajarvi I, Saarela M. Application of a microplate scale fluorochrome staining assay for the assessment of viability of probiotic preparations. J Microbiol Methods. 2005;62:25-35.
  14. Gardiner GE, O'Sullivan E, Kelly J, Auty MA, Fitzgerald GF, Collins JK. et al. Comparative survival rates of humanderived probiotic Lactobacillus paracasei and Lactobacillus salivarius strains during heat treatment and spray drying. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2000;66:2605-12.
  15. LIVE/DEAD(R) BacLightTM bacterial viability kits product information. 2004. (http://products.invitrogen.com/ivgn/product/ L7007?ICID=search-l7007)
  16. Auty MA, Gardiner GE, McBrearty SJ, O'Sullivan EO, Mulvihill DM, Collins JK. et al. Direct in situ viability assessment of bacteria in probiotic dairy products using viability staining in conjunction with confocal scanning laser microscopy. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2001;67:420-5.