Microbial Interactions at Nanobiotechnology Interfaces. Группа авторов. Читать онлайн. Newlib. NEWLIB.NET

Автор: Группа авторов
Издательство: John Wiley & Sons Limited
Серия:
Жанр произведения: Отраслевые издания
Год издания: 0
isbn: 9781119617174
Скачать книгу
number of particles results in exposure of greater numbers of atoms, which could increase the activity. Considering the case of antibacterial system, the formation of biofilm is a key event in the development of resistant bacteria. Exposure of a greater number of atoms on the surface results in increased interaction of NM surface with bacteria, increasing the number of reactive oxygen species at a faster rate followed by inhibition or elimination of the bacteria. Supporting this fact, several recent studies have shown that the size of NMs plays a critical role in dictating the antimicrobial property of the NM.

Schematic illustration of the factors influencing the antimicrobial activity of the NMs.

      Generally, the smaller the size of NM the higher will be the surface area with a high chance of prolonged interaction with microbial system and high diffusion through the cell membrane in comparison to bigger NMs with smaller surface area (Gurunathan et al., 2014). In the case of silver NPs, the size of the NPs clearly influences the surface area exposure, release rate of silver ions, and the antimicrobial efficacy of the particles. Similarly, ZnO NPs of smaller size (12 nm) had better antimicrobial activity in comparison to larger particles of size 45 nm due to its high cell permeability (Padmavathy & Vijayaraghavan, 2008). In another study involving the TiO2 and silica NPs, the antimicrobial property and the mechanism of action of the system were influenced by the size of titanium nanotubes (Çalışkan et al., 2014). In contrast, a study involving three different sizes of Mg(OH)2, the smallest NPs had the least antibacterial effect (Pan et al., 2013). Thus, it is necessary to consider the effect of other factors also with size in determining the mechanism action of NMs.

      1.10.2 Shape

      1.10.3 Zeta Potential

      In addition to size and shape, zeta potential (surface charge) of the NMs is also known to affect the behavior of NMs. It is clear from the literature that the surface charge of the NMs has a strong influence on the adhesion of bacteria. Since bacterial cell surface is negatively charged, NMs with positive charge exert electrostatic attraction, which helps in the adsorption of bacteria onto the surface. This is the reason behind the enhanced ROS production by positively charged NM in comparison to neutral and negatively charged NMs. However, negatively charged NMs exhibit antimicrobial property at a higher concentration through molecular crowding leading to the interaction of NM surface with bacteria.

      Pan et al. (2013) studied the antibacterial activity of Mg(OH)2 prepared using different precursors (MgCl2, MgO, and MgSO4). It has been reported that positively charged Mg(OH)2 NPs prepared with MgCl2 exhibited greater antimicrobial property against E. coli in comparison to negatively charged particles prepared with MgO. This was due to electrostatic interaction between the positively charged Mg(OH)2 with the negatively charged bacterial cell membrane resulting in damage to bacterial cell (Pan et al., 2013).

      1.10.4 Roughness

      1.10.5 Synthesis Methods and Stabilizing Agents

      The choice of synthesis methods and stabilizing agents is very crucial in the fabrication of antimicrobial NMs, since these factors also can influence the properties of the NMs to a major extent. As stated, during synthesis, NMs are synthesized by different methods such as laser ablation, mechanical milling, chemical etching, melt mixing, sputtering, and other chemical methods such as thermolysis, microemulsion, and sol–gel. However, the NMs that are synthesized through the chemical or physical methods are unstable, have surface‐attached toxic materials, and are formed along with toxic by‐products. Considering Ag NPs' synthesis, the process involves a reducing agent such as sodium borohydride or sodium citrate with capping agent such as polyethyl glycol. On the other hand, the biological synthesis methods employ biological sources such as microorganisms and plants. In the case of microbial biosynthesis, the microbes exert a bio‐reduction process to reduce and accumulate the metallic ions to avoid the metal‐related toxicity. The mechanism involves the reduction of metal ions inside the cell through intracellular reducing species and outside using their different extracellular metabolites. Plants also contain a number of reducing agents such as proteins, flavonoids, and other water‐soluble biomolecules (Singh et al., 2018). Green synthesis methods improve the stability of NMs with no hazardous by‐products. Further, they provide a biocompatible coating over NMs, which not only improves the biocompatibility but also increases surface area with reactive groups, which can improve the interaction with biological environment (Singh, Garg, Pandit, Mokkapati, & Mijakovic, 2018). For example, Sudhasree et al. (2014) showed that nickel NPs prepared from Desmodium gangeticum were monodispersed. The green synthesized NPs were found to possess high antibacterial activity against Klebsiella pneumonia, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Proteus vulgaris whereas the chemically synthesized nickel NPs had the least effect on the same microbes. Apart from enhancing the antimicrobial property, it also improved the biocompatibility as observed from biocompatibility studies using LLC PK1 (epithelial cell lines) (Sudhasree et al., 2014). However, the choice of a particular synthesis method depends on the nature of NM required and the type of applications.