| Title |
A blue fluorescent labeling technique utilizing micro- and nanoparticles for tracking in LIVE/DEAD® stained pathogenic biofilms of Staphylococcus aureus and Burkholderia cepacia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s98401 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mareike Klinger-Strobel, Julia Ernst, Christian Lautenschläger, Mathias W Pletz, Dagmar Fischer, Oliwia Makarewicz |
| Abstract |
Strategies that target and treat biofilms are widely applied to bacterial cultures using popular live/dead staining techniques with mostly red or green fluorescent markers (eg, with SYTO(®) 9, propidium iodide, fluorescein). Therefore, visualizing drugs or micro- and nanoparticulate delivery systems to analyze their distribution and effects in biofilms requires a third fluorescent dye that does not interfere with the properties of the live/dead markers. The present study establishes and evaluates a model for tracking polymeric particles in fluorescently stained biological material. To this end, poly(d,l-lactide-co-glycolide) (PLGA)-based micro- and nanoparticles were used as well-established model systems, which, because of their favorable safety profiles, are expected to play important future roles with regard to drug delivery via inhalation. PLGA was covalently and stably labeled with 7-amino-4-methyl-3-coumarinylacetic acid (AMCA), after which blue fluorescent poly(ethylene glycol)-block-PLGA (PEG-PLGA) particles were prepared using a mixture of fluorescent AMCA-PLGA and PEG-PLGA. Because chitosan is known to reduce negative surface charge, blue fluorescent PEG-PLGA-particles with chitosan were also prepared. These micro- and nanoparticles were physicochemically characterized and could be clearly distinguished from live/dead stained bacteria in biofilms using confocal laser scanning microscopy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Russia | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 35 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 17% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 22% |
| Unknown | 4 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 11% |
| Chemistry | 4 | 11% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 19% |
| Unknown | 8 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 February 2016.
All research outputs
#16,048,009
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#1,886
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#222,240
of 406,425 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#34
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 406,425 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.