In the biofilm test assay, the methods states to use polystyrene Microplates. But does not specify which kind rather non-binding, low-binding, medium-binding, or high-binding.
Which is the best microplate 96-well for biofilm growth? To have the most accurate test without false positive or false negative results
The aim of this study is to test some extracts as biofilm inhibitors
We used Corning Hi-Bind. This is similar to ELISA wells in it has a high compatibility with organic compounds.
That's actually a very good question! And I really doubt there is a simple answer...
If you look at Shteindel et al., 2019 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-018-1254-5 you will note that the type of plate (high-binding/untreated vs low) affects the adherence of bacteria to the plate, and I assume, although not tested there, also biofilm formation.
Now, it is important to understand those terms.
(Most) Multititter plates are made from polystyrene, i.e. have aromatic groups on their surface. Thus untreated plates are not very suitable for cell attachment as the membrane is (somewhat) charged.
"Treated" plates are treated by exposure to a plasma gas, modifying the hydrophobic plastic surface to make it more hydrophilic, carrying a net negative charge due to the presence of oxygen-containing functional groups (hydroxyl and carboxyl). This will usually lead to increased cell attachment.
Low-binding/No-binding plates are coated with hydrogel layer that inhibits cellular and protein attachment.
So, wich one is the best? Depending on what you want to simulate/test...
For regular Crystal Violet biofilm assays, we usually use no-treated round bottom plates, but all types are legitimate as long as you know what you use and understand the effect...
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Physical Sciences
- Materials Science
- Plating