The Role of Ionic Strength and Mineral Size to Zeta Potential for the Adhesion of P. putida to Mineral Surfaces

Authors: M. Z. Fathiah, R. G. Edyvean

Abstract:

Electrostatic interaction energy (ΔEEDL) is a part of the Extended Derjaguin-Landau-Verwey-Overbeek (XDLVO) theory, which, together with van der Waals (ΔEVDW) and acid base (ΔEAB) interaction energies, has been extensively used to investigate the initial adhesion of bacteria to surfaces. Electrostatic or electrical double layer interaction energy is considerably affected by surface potential; however it cannot be determined experimentally and is usually replaced by zeta (ζ) potential via electrophoretic mobility. This paper focusses on the effect of ionic concentration as a function of pH and the effect of mineral grain size on ζ potential. It was found that both ionic strength and mineral grain size play a major role in determining the value of ζ potential for the adhesion of P. putida to hematite and quartz surfaces. Higher ζ potential values lead to higher electrostatic interaction energies and eventually to higher total XDLVO interaction energy resulting in bacterial repulsion.

Keywords: XDLVO, Electrostatic interaction energy, zeta potential, P. putida, mineral.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1108779

References:

[1] Flemming. HC, Biofilms and Environmental Protection. Water Sci Technol, 1993. 27(7-8): p. 1-10.
[2] Hermansson, M., The DLVO theory in microbial adhesion. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces, 1999. 14(1–4): p. 105-119.
[3] Carpentier, B. and O. Cerf, Biofilms and their consequences, with particular reference to hygiene in the food industry. Journal of Applied Bacteriology, 1993. 75(6): p. 499-511.
[4] Karunakaran E, et al., "Biofilmology": a multidisciplinary review of the study of microbial biofilms. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol, 2011. 90(6): p. 1869-81 LID - 10.1007/s00253-011-3293-4
[5] Donlan, R.M. and J.W. Costerton, Biofilms: survival mechanisms of clinically relevant microorganisms. Clin Microbiol Rev, 2002. 15(2): p. 167-93.
[6] Costerton J. W, Montanaro L, and Arciola C. R, Biofilm in implant infections: its production and regulation. Int J Artif Organs, 2005. 28(11): p. 1062-8.
[7] Kumar, C.G. and S.K. Anand, Significance of microbial biofilms in food industry: a review. Int J Food Microbiol, 1998. 42(1-2): p. 9-27.
[8] Gristina, A.G., Biomaterial-centered infection: microbial adhesion versus tissue integration. Science, 1987. 237(4822): p. 1588-95.
[9] Lewis, K., Riddle of biofilm resistance. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2001. 45(4): p. 999-1007.
[10] Katsikogianni, M. and Y.F. Missirlis, Concise review of mechanisms of bacterial adhesion to biomaterials and of techniques used in estimating bacteria-mineral interactions. Eur Cell Mater, 2004. 8: p. 37-57.
[11] Busscher, H.J. and A.H. Weerkamp, Specific and non-specific interactions in bacterial adhesion to solid substrata. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 1987. 46(2): p. 165-173.
[12] Fletcher, M., The physiological activity of bacteria attached to solid surfaces. Adv Microb Physiol, 1991. 32: p. 53-85.
[13] Costanzo, P.M., et al., Comparison between Direct Contact Angle Measurements and Thin Layer Wicking on Synthetic Monosized Cuboid Hematite Particles. Langmuir, 1995. 11(5): p. 1827-1830.
[14] Boks N.P, et al., Forces involved in bacterial adhesion to hydrophilic and hydrophobic surfaces. Microbiology, 2008. 154(Pt 10): p. 3122-33 LID - 10.1099/mic.0.2008/018622-0
[doi].
[15] van Loosdrecht M. C, et al., The role of bacterial cell wall hydrophobicity in adhesion. Appl Environ Microbiol, 1987. 53(8): p. 1893-7.
[16] Jacobs A, et al., Kinetic adhesion of bacterial cells to sand: cell surface properties and adhesion. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces, 2007. 59(1): p. 35-45.
[17] Derjaguin, B.V. and L. Landau, Theory of the Stability of Strongly Charged Lyophobic Sols and of the Adhesion of Strongly Charged Particles in Solutions of Electrolytes. Acta Phys. Chim. URSS, 1941. 14: p. 633-662.
[18] Verwey E.J.W and Overbeek J.T.G, “Theory of the stability of lyophobic colloids. The interaction of particles having an electric double layer.” with the collaboration of K. van Ness. Elsevier, New York-Amsterdam, 1948, 216 pp. Journal of Polymer Science, 1949. 4(3): p. 413-414.
[19] Bhattacharjee, S., M. Elimelech, and M. Borkovec, DLVO interaction between colloidal particles: beyond Derjaguin's approximation. Croatica Chemica Acta, 1998. 71: p. 883-903.
[20] Sharma, P.K. and K. Hanumantha Rao, Adhesion of Paenibacillus polymyxa on chalcopyrite and pyrite: surface thermodynamics and extended DLVO theory. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces, 2003. 29(1): p. 21-38.
[21] Kosmulski M, et al., Synthesis and characterization of goethite and goethite-hematite composite. Adv Colloid Interface Sci, 2003. 103(1): p. 57-76.
[22] Shashikala, A.R. and A.M. Raichur, Role of interfacial phenomena in determining adsorption of Bacillus polymyxa onto hematite and quartz. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces, 2002. 24(1): p. 11-20.
[23] Bunt, C.R., D.S. Jones, and I.G. Tucker, The effects of pH, ionic strength and polyvalent ions on the cell surface hydrophobicity of Escherichia coli evaluated by the BATH and HIC methods. International Journal of Pharmaceutics, 1995. 113(2): p. 257-261.
[24] Chen, W., 'What is Zeta Potential' Dow Chemical. American Filtration and Separation Society (AFS)