Next Article in Journal
Prevalence, Risk Factors, and Endoscopic Findings of Helicobacter pylori Infection Among Lebanese Patients Undergoing Gastroscopy: A Retrospective Study from a Single Tertiary Center
Previous Article in Journal
Establishing Priority Pediatric Antimicrobial Stewardship Interventions in the US: Findings from a Delphi Consensus Study
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Antibiotics
Volume 14
Issue 10
10.3390/antibiotics14101010
antibiotics-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Impact of Light-Activated Nanocomposite with Erythrosine B on agr Quorum Sensing System in Staphylococcus aureus

by
Larysa Bugyna
1,2,
Ľubomír Švantner
1,
Katarína Bilská
1,
Marek Pribus
3 and
Helena Bujdáková
1,*
1
Department of Microbiology and Virology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Comenius University in Bratislava, Mlynská dolina, Ilkovičova 6, 842 15 Bratislava, Slovakia
2
Institute of Laboratory Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Slovak Medical University, Limbova 14, 833 03 Bratislava, Slovakia
3
Institute of Inorganic Chemistry, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravská Cesta 9, 845 36 Bratislava, Slovakia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Antibiotics 2025, 14(10), 1010; https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics14101010
Submission received: 29 August 2025 / Revised: 5 October 2025 / Accepted: 7 October 2025 / Published: 11 October 2025
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Backround: The agr (accessory gene regulator) quorum sensing (QS) system of Staphylococcus aureus participates significantly in its virulence and biofilm formation—either through its activation or suppression. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of photoactive nanomaterials that have been functionalized with erythrosine B (EryB) on the modulation of this agr QS system on three methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA). Methods: The functionality of the agr system was determined by the CAMP test and by quantitative PCR (qPCR) to analyze the expression of the hld gene, which is located within the RNAIII and encodes δ-hemolysin. The biofilm was evaluated by crystal violet assay and fluorescence microscopy. The anti-biofilm activity was determined by calculating the colony-forming units. The relative expression of the hld gene, determined by qPCR. Results: Using the CAMP test, S66 and S68 strains were found to be agr-positive, and strain S73 was agr-negative. The relative expression of the hld gene increased only in the agr-positive strains (600- and 1000-fold). In these strains, the biofilm was less compact compared to the dense biofilm formed by the agr-negative strain. The anti-biofilm effectiveness on the nanocomposite with EryB after irradiation reduced the growth of biofilm cells by 100- to 1000-fold compared to the biofilm on polyurethane alone. The qPCR results showed a significant decrease in the relative expression of the hld gene in the agr-positive strains after irradiation compared to the non-irradiated samples. Conclusions: These results suggest that photoactive nanocomposites with EryB can significantly reduce biofilm formed by MRSA strains, regardless of the functionality of the agr QS system.

1. Introduction

Methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) [1,2,3,4] has remained a continual problem in both hospital- and community-acquired infections [5,6,7,8]. These resistant bacteria are particularly relevant in connection with the formation of biofilms [9,10,11] on abiotic and biotic surfaces, such as catheters, implants, or damaged tissue in wounds or heart valves and bones [11,12]. The development of S. aureus biofilm is a complex process regulated by the quorum sensing (QS) system—a signaling mechanism used for communication within the microbial community [13,14,15].
The agr (accessory gene regulator) QS system [13,14,15,16,17] plays a key role in virulence, biofilm formation, and the adaptation of S. aureus to environmental conditions [16,18,19]. Activation of the agr system is mediated by an autoinducing peptide (AIP) that accumulates in the extracellular space with increasing bacterial density. AIP binds to the membrane sensor AgrC (sensory histidine kinase), which leads to phosphorylation of the response regulator AgrA. This triggers transcription from the P2 and P3 promoters, which leads to auto-amplification of the agr operon and activates the transcription of RNAIII (a 514-nucleotide-long regulatory RNA). RNAIII is the main effector molecule of the agr system that controls more than 200 genes, including those encoding many virulence factors [20,21,22,23,24,25]. RNAIII positively regulates the expression of secreted toxins and enzymes, such as α-hemolysin (hla) [26,27], δ-hemolysin (hld) [28,29,30], and serine proteases (ssp) [31]. On the other hand, RNAIII inhibits the expression of surface adhesins, such as protein A (spa) [32,33], which facilitate adherence [31,34]. Activation of the agr system also leads to decreased biofilm production, probably by reducing the amount of the aforementioned surface adhesins and promoting the expression of proteases that contribute to the disruption of biofilm structure and dispersion of biofilm cells [21,35]. The activity of the agr system can be assessed using the Christie–Atkins–Munch-Peterson (CAMP) test to evaluate δ-toxin production as the main marker of agr activity [36,37]. While the agr-positive strains are typically associated with the acute phase of infection, the agr-negative strains are usually characterized by increased biofilm stability and suppressed δ-toxin production. These strains are generally less virulent in acute infections, but they may be associated with persistent biofilm-related infections [38,39,40]. A simplified model of the effect of the agr QS system on virulence factors and biofilm formation is presented in Figure 1.
One of the most promising antimicrobial strategies to combat biofilms is photodynamic inactivation (PDI) [41,42,43,44]. This approach uses a photosensitizer (PS) [45,46], which generates singlet oxygen (1O2) and reactive oxygen species (ROS), such as hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) and hydroxyl radicals (-OH), when irradiated with light in the presence of molecular oxygen [47,48,49,50]. These ROS damage cell membranes, proteins, lipids, and nucleic acids, leading to the death of microorganisms [48,49,51]. One of the most promising photosensitizers is erythrosine B (EryB), which has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) [52] for use in the pharmaceutical industry [45]. Its absorption maximum is in the green spectral range (~530 nm) [53]. Recent advances have enabled the integration of PS into nanocomposites to enhance the anti-biofilm activity of PDI [53,54,55] against S. aureus, showing potential for the modification of medical device surfaces [12,53,54,56].
This study aimed to evaluate the effect of photoactive nanomaterials that have been functionalized with EryB on the modulation of the agr QS system, which plays a key role in virulence regulation and is associated with biofilm formation, either through its activation or suppression. This was also the reason why we used clinical MRSA isolates with different agr QS system activities for the presented study. Additionally, investigating PDI in relation to the agr QS system in the clinically important bacterium S. aureus expands knowledge of antimicrobial properties of nanomaterial functionalized with the photoactive molecule EryB.

2. Results

2.1. Activity of the agr QS System and Biofilm Formation

In this study, three clinical isolates of S. aureus with different activities of the agr QS system and the standard strain CCM 3953 (corresponding to RN4220) were used for experiments. The activity of the agr QS system was characterized phenotypically by the modified CAMP test (Figure 2A). Clinical MRSA strains of S66 and S68 showed enhanced hemolysis (Figure 2A, indicated by arrows), indicating the production of α- and δ-hemolysin, which suggests a functional agr system (agr-positive). In contrast, strain S73 did not show enhanced hemolysis, indicating a non-functional agr system (agr-negative). The results observed in the CAMP test were also confirmed by quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) based on the expression of the hld gene, which is located within RNAIII and encodes δ-hemolysin (Figure 2B). This experiment was performed with planktonic cells of S. aureus. Strains S66 and S68 showed more than 600- and 1000-fold increase in relative hld gene expression, respectively, compared to the standard strain CCM 3953. Strain S73 showed only a 1.8-fold increase in hld gene expression compared to CCM 3953, which is not considered relevant from a molecular point of view. These results are consistent with the observed weak hemolytic activity.
The ability to form biofilm was assessed by crystal violet assay (Figure 3A) and supported by microscopic observation (Figure 3B). The results, summarized in Figure 3A, showed that the standard strain CCM 3953 and agr-negative MRSA strain S73 were strong biofilm producers, while the agr-positive strains S66 and S68 produced less biofilm. Fluorescence microscopy with DAPI staining confirmed dense and compact biofilm layers of strains CCM 3953 and S73. On the other hand, the agr-positive strains S66 and S68 formed scattered biofilm clusters with low density (Figure 3B).

2.2. Anti-Biofilm Effectiveness of Nanocomposite Functionalized with EryB

The nanocomposite disks based on modified polyurethane (PU) were prepared as described by Bugyna et al. [53]. Organoclay dispersion with EryB (Sap/PDDA/EryB), used in modification, was prepared by functionalization of a synthetic layered silicate saponite Sumecton (Sap) and poly (diallyldimethylammonium chloride) (PDDA) dispersion with an aqueous solution of EryB. PU alone was set as the control sample, and PU/Sap/PDDA was the sample without functionalized EryB. The antimicrobial efficacy of PU/Sap/PDDA/EryB nanocomposites was tested on 24-h biofilms of two agr-positive (S66, S68) and one agr-negative MRSA isolate. Figure 4 shows the effectiveness on biofilms formed on the modified nanomaterial compared to those grown on unmodified PU. The results showed that the non-irradiated samples did not manifest any antimicrobial efficacy. A significant reduction in biofilm cells was only observed after 10 min of irradiation with a green laser. The clinical isolates S66, S68, and S73 showed more than 100-fold reduction in colony-forming units (CFU mL−1) compared to the control biofilms formed by respective strains on PU alone. The effectiveness on the standard strain CCM 3953 was already tested and published in the work of Bugyna et al. [53] under the same conditions as in the present research. The inhibition was almost 1000-fold in the irradiated sample compared to the control biofilm grown on PU alone.

2.3. Analysis of the Effect of Photoactive Nanomaterial on hld Gene Expression Changes

The expression of the hld gene, which is located within RNAIII, was analyzed by qPCR. The results are summarized in Figure 5. Strain S66 slightly increased the expression of the hld gene in biofilms formed on both Sap/PDDA and non-irradiated composite with EryB, but this change was not significant. On the other hand, the results showed a significant decrease in the relative expression of the hld gene for the agr-positive strains (S66 and S68) after irradiation compared to the non-irradiated sample. The standard strains CCM 3953 and S73 showed no significant changes on the modified photoactive material compared to the non-irradiated samples.

3. Discussion

The Gram-positive bacterium S. aureus is a pathogen that can cause a broad spectrum of infections, ranging from minor skin lesions to severe, potentially fatal disease due to numerous virulence factors [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,57,58,59]. An important role in the regulation of these virulence factors is played by the agr QS system, which controls the expression of many genes via the effector molecule RNAIII [37,60,61]. The functionality of the agr QS system can be assessed using the CAMP test, which is based on the interaction of S. aureus hemolysins: the ability of β-hemolysin to inhibit α-hemolysin while increasing the activity of δ-hemolysin [62].
In our previous study, we presented an advanced nanocomposite modified with EryB that exhibited anti-biofilm properties [53]. Its effectiveness was tested on the standard strain S. aureus CCM 3953 by comparing two light sources (laser vs. LED light) and optimizing the irradiation time. The results showed an almost 1000-fold inhibition after 10 min of irradiation with a green laser. In addition, the formation of ROS was detected with 2,7-dichlorodihydrofluorescein diacetate. Garapati et al. [63] investigated EryB-based nanoparticles, which also exhibited anti-biofilm activity against S. aureus cells [63].
Based on our previous findings, the EryB-modified nanomaterial was tested using three MRSA isolates in this study. Since the formation of strong or weak biofilm is related to the agr system [13,17,64], the tested strains were also selected based on their activity of the mentioned QS system; they were representatives with high, lower, and no activity (CAMP test). It is also important to mention that the activity of the agr system is associated with effective eradication of internal and external ROS [15,65]. Since the antimicrobial effect of PDI is based on the production of large amounts of singlet oxygen and ROS, it was interesting to investigate the effect of PDI on the agr system. Its activity was determined by the expression of the hld gene, which is associated with RNAIII. Kumar et al. [65] confirmed that ROS are more accumulated in the agr-mutant compared to the wild-type. They also demonstrated that pre-treatment of S. aureus with menadione protected the mutant strain from the killing effect by H2O2, confirming that the agr system participates in the control of endogenous, but also exogenous ROS [65]. According to our results, no difference was observed between agr-positive and agr-negative strains in the response to PDI, as the irradiation of nanocomposites reduced the survival of biofilm cells of all strains by about 100-fold compared to the control biofilm grown on PU alone. Results from the qPCR showed a significantly decreased relative expression of the hld gene in the irradiated biofilm on the nanocomposite compared to the control sample on the PU alone and even to that formed on the non-irradiated nanocomposite, suggesting a significant reduction in the activity of the agr QS system. On the other hand, no change in the hld gene expression was observed in the agr-negative strains. Our results indicate that ROS generated during PDI probably contributed to the suppression of the agr system. This could be because of abolishing AgrA (the regulator of the agr system) though stress-mediated covalent binding of CoA (coenzyme A), leading to significantly decreased affinity towards the P2 and P3 promoters, which are critical for the functionality of the agr system (transcription of the RNAII and RNAIII) [66,67]. However, further targeted studies will be required to clarify how ROS specifically influence agr signaling pathways.
Several recent studies have demonstrated how PDI affects QS in different bacterial species. In Pseudomonas aeruginosa, PDI inhibited the LasIR system, which is responsible for QS, biofilm formation, and virulence [68]. Another study showed that indocyanine green-mediated PDI reduced the expression of the abaI, agrA, and lasI genes in mixed biofilms of Acinetobacter baumannii, S. aureus, and P. aeruginosa [69]. Some studies showed that sublethal doses of PDI with chlorine e6 and laser light (λ = 664 nm) induce stress responses of S. aureus and activate agr-dependent gene regulation. Mutant strains of S. aureus with a non-functional agr system were significantly more sensitive to PDI, suggesting that the agr system is involved in protection against oxidative stress induced by PDI [70,71]. Although clinical isolates of S66 and S68 showed significantly increased expression of the hld gene in planktonic cells, this expression was considerably reduced after irradiation of biofilms formed on photoactive nanocomposites. Our results show that the main antibacterial effect of PDI is mediated by ROS, as the survival of both agr-positive and agr-negative strains was reduced to a similar extent. At the same time, in agr-positive strains, PDI also reduced hld expression, indicating partial suppression of the agr system in addition to the general effect caused by ROS. Nevertheless, the nanocomposites with EryB displayed strong anti-biofilm effectiveness, suggesting that their activity is not dependent on the modulation of the QS pathway through the hld gene. These results suggest that photoactive nanocomposites can disrupt biofilms independently of QS regulation and, thereby, extend their potential applicability against MRSA clinical isolates.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Bacterial Strains and Microplate-Based Assessment of Biofilm Formation

The standard strain S. aureus CCM 3953 (Czech Collection of Microorganisms, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic, corresponding to the strain RN4220 recommended for the CAMP test) and three clinical MRSA isolates, S66, S68, and S73 (isolated from hemocultures, Institute of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Comenius University Bratislava, Slovakia), were used for experimental research. All strains were stored as stock cultures at −20 °C. Overnight cultures were incubated in Mueller–Hinton broth (MHB; Biolife, Milan, Italy) for 16 h at 37 °C. Samples were then transferred into fresh MHB and grown to an exponential phase OD600 = 0.5 (corresponding to ≈ 2 × 107 cells mL−1) [12] at 37 °C with shaking at 150 rpm in an incubator (Thermo shaker PST-60H2-4 Biosan, Riga, Latvia). Columbia NutriSelect™ Plus blood agar (Becton Dickinson, Franklin Lakes, NJ, USA) was used to monitor the hemolytic activity of the S. aureus strains.
The 24-h biofilm was formed from the pre-incubated cultures (exponential phase). A 96-well plate was used to incubate the biofilm. A total of 100 µL from the pre-incubated culture and 100 µL of MHB were added to each well. The plates were incubated for 24 h at 37 °C. Biofilm was quantified by crystal violet staining [72,73]. Briefly, the biofilms were washed three times with 100 µL of phosphate-buffered saline (PBS; 137 mM NaCl, 2.7 mM KCl, 8 mM Na2HPO4, and 2 mM KH2PO4; CentralChem, Bratislava, Slovakia) and then stained with 0.1% crystal violet solution for 30 min at room temperature. Then the dye was extracted using 200 µL of 96% ethanol (CentralChem, Bratislava, Slovakia), followed by incubation for 30 min. Then 110 μL was transferred to a new plate. The absorbance was measured by a spectrophotometer (Dynex MRX-TC Revelation, Dynex Technologies, Chantilly, VI, USA) at OD570 nm to quantify the biofilms.
Biofilm samples of all strains were observed using fluorescence microscopy (Intraco Micro LM 600, Tachlovice, Czech Republic). The biofilms were previously grown on glass slides (12 mm diameter, Marienfeld-Superior, Lauda-Königshofen, Germany) in a 24-well plate. After 24 h of incubation, biofilms were washed with PBS, and then glass slides were transferred to a microscope slide, where a drop of fixation solution with DAPI (Fluoromount-GTM, with DAPI, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) had previously been applied. After 48 h of dark incubation at 4 °C, a drop of immersion oil (Immersol™ Immersion Oil, Zeiss, Germany) was applied to the slide, and biofilms were observed at a magnification of 1000× under the UV filter (excitation: 340–380 nm, emission: 435–485 nm).

4.2. Analysis of AGR System Functionality Using the CAMP Test

The CAMP test was performed on Columbia NutriSelect™ Plus blood agar supplemented with 5% sheep blood. Overnight cultures of all strains of S. aureus adjusted to ≈ OD600 = 0.5 were used for inoculation. The reference strain S. aureus CCM 3953 was streaked in the center of the agar plate. Clinical isolates of S66, S68, and S73 were inoculated perpendicular to the reference strain at a distance of 2–3 mm without touching. Plates were incubated statically for 24 h at 37 °C and then for another 24 h at 4 °C. The CAMP test was evaluated according to Traber et al. [36]. The functionality of the agr system was confirmed by enhanced hemolysis at the site of interaction of the tested and reference strains. The absence of enhanced hemolysis indicated a non-functional agr system.

4.3. Preparation of Nanocomposites and PDI

The nanocomposite was prepared as already described by Bugyna et al. [53]. Briefly, the nanomaterial was based on clay mineral, synthetic saponite (Sap; Kunimine Industries Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan), modified with poly(diallyldimethyl ammonium) cations (PDDA; Sigma Aldrich, Steinheim, Germany) and with or without EryB (Sigma Aldrich Corpo-ration, St. Louis, MO, USA) and was functionalized on a PU (PU; VARNISH-PU 2 KW, Iso-mat S.A., Thessaloniki, Greece) surface. Solutions of PDDA and EryB and a colloidal dispersion of Sap were prepared in deionized water and mixed. At first, the solution of PDDA was mixed with a colloidal dispersion of Sap (nPDDA/mSap = 1.5 mmol g−1), followed by the addition of EryB (nEryB/mSap = 1.5 mmol g−1) to the prepared colloidal dispersion of organically modified Sap. After being shaken at room temperature for 120 h, organoclay was filtered using membrane filters made from hydrophilic polytetrafluoro-ethylene (0.1 μm pore size, 47 mm diameter, Omnipore™, Millipore, Merck, Darmstadt, Germany). Then, a liquid PU was applied on the hybrid film with or without EryB. The nanocomposite was then left for 24 h in an air stream to dry. Then, it was peeled off the membrane. The nanocomposite disks PU/Sap/PDDA or PU/Sap/PDDA/EryB were cut into smaller pieces (1 cm2), sterilized by UV (10 min on both sides), and fixed with 2% agarose (150 µL) to the bottom of the wells of a 24-well plate (TC Plate, Sardstedt AG & Co., Ltd., Nümbrecht, Germany).
The prepared nanocomposite was characterized by attenuated total reflectance infrared (ATR IR) spectroscopy, absorption and fluorescence spectroscopy, and X-ray diffraction in our previous study [53]. Briefly, the absorption maximum of EryB adsorbed on the nanomaterial applied on PU matrix was at 542 nm, with a shoulder at 505 nm, which meant that a green laser with an emission wavelength of 532 nm was suitable for irradiation of the prepared samples, because its emission wavelength falls within the absorption spectrum of EryB. The emission maximum of EryB being adsorbed on the nanocomposite applied on the PU matrix was at 578 nm. The maximum adsorption capacity of EryB on Sap/PDDA nanoparticles was determined using absorption spectroscopy. It was found that the maximum adsorption capacity of EryB on Sap modified with PDDA polycation (1.5 mmol per 1 g of Sap) particles was 0.397 mmol·g–1. ATR IR spectroscopy was used to detect the presence of individual components and functional groups on the surface of the prepared samples. From the measured infrared spectra of pure components, as well as the nanomaterial, it could be seen that the surface of PU was covered with Sap/PDDA or Sap/PDDA/EryB (vibrational bands of pure PU disappeared, while new vibrational bands belonging to Sap, PDDA polycation, and EryB appeared in the infrared spectra).
A 24-h biofilms of CCM 3953 and clinical isolates were prepared in the 24-well microtiter plate by adding 0.5 mL of culture (OD600 = 0.5) and 0.5 mL of MHB to each well. After 24 h of static incubation at 37 °C, the medium was removed, and 50 µL of PBS was added to the wells to prevent dehydration during subsequent irradiation. The distance between the laser tip and the bottom of the 24-well plate was set to 5 cm during irradiation with a green laser (λ = 532 nm, 100 mW, Alligator, MZTech s.r.o., Košice, Slovakia) for 10 min. After irradiation, the samples were transferred to Eppendorf tubes with 1 mL PBS, sonicated (Branson 200 ultrasonic cleaner, Danbury, CT, USA) for 5 min, vortexed (Vortex V-1 plus, Biosan, Riga, Latvia) for 5 min, serially diluted, and inoculated on MHA. After 24-h incubation at 37 °C, (CFU mL−1) were calculated.

4.4. Isolation of RNA and qPCR

Planktonic cells in the exponential phase and 24-h biofilms grown on nanocomposites were used for RNA isolation. Planktonic cells were pre-incubated to OD600 = 0.5 and centrifuged (Universal 32 R, Hettich Zentrifugen, Tuttlingen, Germany) for 5 min at 2152× g. The biofilms grown on nanocomposite were irradiated with a green laser for 10 min (according to the protocol described in Section 4.3). After irradiation, biofilms were centrifuged for 5 min at 2152× g. Then, 150 μL of PBS and 20 μL of lysozyme (Fluka Analytical, Taufkirchen, Germany, 20 mg/mL) were added to the pellet, and the samples were vortexed and incubated for 30 min at 37 °C. Subsequently, 200 μL of Homogenization Solution, 200 μL of Lysis Buffer, and 200 μL of Lytic Enhancer (all provided by Maxwell RSC miRNA Tissue Kit, Promega, Madison, WI, USA) were added. Sterile glass beads (0.5 µm and 0.1 µm, 1:1 ratio, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) were added to the tubes, and the samples were vortexed for 20 min at 3500 RPM and centrifuged for 5 min at 10,413× g. Then 30 μL of proteinase K (provided by the Maxwell RSC miRNA Tissue Kit, Promega, Madison, WI, USA) was added to the tubes, and the samples were incubated for 15 min at 37 °C in a thermoblock (Termoblock MD-01N-110/220, Major Science, Saratoga, CA, USA) and centrifuged (5 min, 10,413× g).
For RNA isolation, a Maxwell RSC instrument (Promega, Madison, WI, USA) was used. A total of 600 µL of each sample, 10 µL of DNase (the Maxwell RSC miRNA Tissue Kit, Promega, Madison, WI, USA), and 50 µL of Nuclease-free water (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) were added to the cartridge. After isolation, samples were kept on ice. RNA concentration and purity was determined using a NanoDrop Spectrophotometer ND-1000 (NanoDrop Technologies, Wilmington, DE, USA), and samples were stored at −80 °C until used. Then, RNA samples were reverse-transcribed into cDNA using the Maxima First Strand cDNA Synthesis kit for RT-qPCR (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) according to the manufacturer’s instructions; cDNA samples were stored at −20 °C until used.
The qPCR was used to analyze the expression of the hld gene (forward: 5′-GAAGGAGTGATTTCAATGGCACAAG-3′; reverse: 5′ GAAAGTAATTAATTATTCATCTTATTTTTTAGTGAATTTG-3′) [37], normalized to the housekeeping gene rpoD (forward: 5′-CAC GAG TGA TTG CTT GTC-3; reverse: 5′-GAT ACG TAG GTC GTG GTA TG-3′) [74]. All primers were synthesized by Metabion International AG Planegg/Steinkirchen, Germany. Separate qPCR mastermixes were prepared for the hld gene and the housekeeping gene rpoD. The qPCR thermal protocol was performed as recommended by the manufacturer. HOT FIREPol® EvaGreen® qPCR Mix Plus (ROX) 5x (Solis BioDyne OÜ, Tartu, Estonia) and LightCycler® PRO System (Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN, USA) were used for qPCR. The annealing temperature was set to 55 °C for 20 s. Data were analyzed in LightCycler PRO® Development Software 1.0.0 (Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN, USA). Relative gene expression was calculated using the 2ΔΔCT method [75], with rpoD as the reference gene [74]. For the experiment with planktonic cells, the relative expression of the hld gene was normalized to S. aureus CCM 3953, which was set to a value of 1. For experiments with biofilms on nanocomposites, changes in the hld gene expression were calculated using biofilm on non-modified PU of each strain as a control sample set to 1.

4.5. Statistical Analysis

Statistical significance was determined with Student’s t-test using the GraphPad Prism software 10.6.0 (Graph Pad, San Diego, CA, USA). p < 0.05 (*) was considered statistically significant; p < 0.01 (**); p < 0.001 (***); p < 0.0001 (****). p > 0.05 (ns) was considered non-significant.

5. Conclusions

The presented work showed that the photoactive nanocomposite functionalized with EryB can modulate the agr QS system in MRSA isolates. Since biofilm formation did not significantly increase despite the decreased relative expression of the hld gene—the most important marker for RNAIII activity and functionality of the agr system—it is assumed that biofilm formation is affected by genes that are independent of this system. In addition, the nanocomposite functionalized with EryB significantly decreased the survival of biofilms formed by both agr-negative and agr-positive strains after irradiation.
The presented photoactive nanocomposite represents a promising direction for further research, considering the potential of modified polymers for various applications, particularly in healthcare manufacturing, where specific surface properties are essential to reduce microbial colonization.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, H.B., L.B. and K.B.; methodology, L.B., Ľ.Š., K.B. and M.P.; validation, H.B.; investigation, L.B. and Ľ.Š.; writing—original draft preparation, L.B., H.B. and K.B.; writing—review and editing, H.B., L.B., K.B., Ľ.Š. and M.P.; supervision, H.B.; funding acquisition, H.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by EU Next Generation EU through the Recovery and Resilience Plan for Slovakia under the project No. 09I03-03-V01-00105 from the Government Office of the Slovak Republic, by the Slovak Research and Development Agency under contracts of No. APVV-21-0302 and APVV-22-0150, and by the Ministry of Education, Research, Development and Youth of the Slovak Republic under contract VEGA 1/0240/23. M. Pribus acknowledges the financial support of the Slovak Academy of Sciences Grant Programme for Postdoctoral Fellows “PostdokGrant”, grant No. APD0134.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data have been published to Zenodo: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17295144.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Algammal, A.M.; Hetta, H.F.; Elkelish, A.; Alkhalifah, D.H.H.; Hozzein, W.N.; Batiha, G.E.-S.; El Nahhas, N.; Mabrok, M.A. Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA): One Health Perspective Approach to the Bacterium Epidemiology, Virulence Factors, Antibiotic-Resistance, and Zoonotic Impact. Infect. Drug Resist. 2020, 13, 3255–3265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. McCarthy, H.; Rudkin, J.K.; Black, N.S.; Gallagher, L.; O’Neill, E.; O’Gara, J.P. Methicillin Resistance and the Biofilm Phenotype in Staphylococcus aureus. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 2015, 5, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Stryjewski, M.E.; Corey, G.R. Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus: An Evolving Pathogen. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2014, 58, S10–S19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Turner, N.A.; Sharma-Kuinkel, B.K.; Maskarinec, S.A.; Eichenberger, E.M.; Shah, P.P.; Carugati, M.; Holland, T.L.; Fowler, V.G. Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus: An Overview of Basic and Clinical Research. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2019, 17, 203–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Dayan, G.H.; Mohamed, N.; Scully, I.L.; Cooper, D.; Begier, E.; Eiden, J.; Jansen, K.U.; Gurtman, A.; Anderson, A.S. Staphylococcus aureus: The Current State of Disease, Pathophysiology and Strategies for Prevention. Expert Rev. Vaccines 2016, 15, 1373–1392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Lee, A.S.; de Lencastre, H.; Garau, J.; Kluytmans, J.; Malhotra-Kumar, S.; Peschel, A.; Harbarth, S. Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Nat. Rev. Dis. Primers 2018, 4, 18033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Shoaib, M.; Aqib, A.I.; Muzammil, I.; Majeed, N.; Bhutta, Z.A.; Kulyar, M.F.-E.-A.; Fatima, M.; Zaheer, C.-N.F.; Muneer, A.; Murtaza, M.; et al. MRSA Compendium of Epidemiology, Transmission, Pathophysiology, Treatment, and Prevention within One Health Framework. Front. Microbiol. 2022, 13, 1067284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Rasheed, N.; Hussein, N. Staphylococcus aureus: An Overview of Discovery, Characteristics, Epidemiology, Virulence Factors and Antimicrobial Sensitivity. Eur. J. Mol. Clin. Med. 2021, 8, 1160–1183. [Google Scholar]
  9. Costerton, J.W.; Lewandowski, Z.; Caldwell, D.E.; Korber, D.R.; Lappin-Scott, H.M. Microbial Biofilms. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 1995, 49, 711–745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Liu, H.Y.; Prentice, E.L.; Webber, M.A. Mechanisms of Antimicrobial Resistance in Biofilms. npj Antimicrob. Resist. 2024, 2, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Tuon, F.F.; Suss, P.H.; Telles, J.P.; Dantas, L.R.; Borges, N.H.; Ribeiro, V.S.T. Antimicrobial Treatment of Staphylococcus aureus Biofilms. Antibiotics 2023, 12, 87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Dadi, N.C.T.; Radochová, B.; Vargová, J.; Bujdáková, H. Impact of Healthcare-Associated Infections Connected to Medical Devices-An Update. Microorganisms 2021, 9, 2332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Schilcher, K.; Horswill, A.R. Staphylococcal Biofilm Development: Structure, Regulation, and Treatment Strategies. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. MMBR 2020, 84, e00026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Kong, K.-F.; Vuong, C.; Otto, M. Staphylococcus Quorum Sensing in Biofilm Formation and Infection. Int. J. Med. Microbiol. 2006, 296, 133–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Podkowik, M.; Perault, A.I.; Putzel, G.; Pountain, A.; Kim, J.; DuMont, A.L.; Zwack, E.E.; Ulrich, R.J.; Karagounis, T.K.; Zhou, C.; et al. Quorum-Sensing Agr System of Staphylococcus aureus Primes Gene Expression for Protection from Lethal Oxidative Stress. eLife 2024, 12, RP89098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Vinodhini, V.; Kavitha, M. Deciphering Agr Quorum Sensing in Staphylococcus aureus: Insights and Therapeutic Prospects. Mol. Biol. Rep. 2024, 51, 155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Boles, B.R.; Horswill, A.R. Agr-Mediated Dispersal of Staphylococcus aureus Biofilms. PLoS Pathog. 2008, 4, e1000052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Verbeke, F.; De Craemer, S.; Debunne, N.; Janssens, Y.; Wynendaele, E.; Van de Wiele, C.; De Spiegeleer, B. Peptides as Quorum Sensing Molecules: Measurement Techniques and Obtained Levels In Vitro and In Vivo. Front. Neurosci. 2017, 11, 183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Le, K.Y.; Otto, M. Quorum-Sensing Regulation in Staphylococci-an Overview. Front. Microbiol. 2015, 6, 1174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Thoendel, M.; Horswill, A.R. Identification of Staphylococcus aureus AgrD Residues Required for Autoinducing Peptide Biosynthesis. J. Biol. Chem. 2009, 284, 21828–21838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Queck, S.Y.; Jameson-Lee, M.; Villaruz, A.E.; Bach, T.-H.L.; Khan, B.A.; Sturdevant, D.E.; Ricklefs, S.M.; Li, M.; Otto, M. RNAIII-Independent Target Gene Control by the Agr Quorum-Sensing System: Insight into the Evolution of Virulence Regulation in Staphylococcus aureus. Mol. Cell 2008, 32, 150–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Ji, G.; Beavis, R.C.; Novick, R.P. Cell Density Control of Staphylococcal Virulence Mediated by an Octapeptide Pheromone. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1995, 92, 12055–12059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Novick, R.P.; Ross, H.F.; Projan, S.J.; Kornblum, J.; Kreiswirth, B.; Moghazeh, S. Synthesis of Staphylococcal Virulence Factors Is Controlled by a Regulatory RNA Molecule. EMBO J. 1993, 12, 3967–3975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Novick, R.P. Autoinduction and Signal Transduction in the Regulation of Staphylococcal Virulence. Mol. Microbiol. 2003, 48, 1429–1449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Novick, R.P.; Geisinger, E. Quorum Sensing in Staphylococci. Annu. Rev. Genet. 2008, 42, 541–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Morfeldt, E.; Taylor, D.; von Gabain, A.; Arvidson, S. Activation of Alpha-Toxin Translation in Staphylococcus aureus by the Trans-Encoded Antisense RNA, RNAIII. EMBO J. 1995, 14, 4569–4577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Jenul, C.; Horswill, A.R. Regulation of Staphylococcus aureus Virulence. Microbiol. Spectr. 2019, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Janzon, L.; Löfdahl, S.; Arvidson, S. Identification and Nucleotide Sequence of the Delta-Lysin Gene, Hld, Adjacent to the Accessory Gene Regulator (Agr) of Staphylococcus aureus. Mol. Gen. Genet. 1989, 219, 480–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Janzon, L.; Arvidson, S. The Role of the Delta-Lysin Gene (Hld) in the Regulation of Virulence Genes by the Accessory Gene Regulator (agr) in Staphylococcus aureus. EMBO J. 1990, 9, 1391–1399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Gagnaire, J.; Dauwalder, O.; Boisset, S.; Khau, D.; Freydière, A.-M.; Ader, F.; Bes, M.; Lina, G.; Tristan, A.; Reverdy, M.-E.; et al. Detection of Staphylococcus aureus Delta-Toxin Production by Whole-Cell MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometry. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e40660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Tegmark, K.; Morfeldt, E.; Arvidson, S. Regulation of Agr-Dependent Virulence Genes in Staphylococcus aureus by RNAIII from Coagulase-Negative Staphylococci. J. Bacteriol. 1998, 180, 3181–3186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Benito, Y.; Kolb, F.A.; Romby, P.; Lina, G.; Etienne, J.; Vandenesch, F. Probing the Structure of RNAIII, the Staphylococcus aureus Agr Regulatory RNA, and Identification of the RNA Domain Involved in Repression of Protein A Expression. RNA 2000, 6, 668–679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Huntzinger, E.; Boisset, S.; Saveanu, C.; Benito, Y.; Geissmann, T.; Namane, A.; Lina, G.; Etienne, J.; Ehresmann, B.; Ehresmann, C.; et al. Staphylococcus aureus RNAIII and the Endoribonuclease III Coordinately Regulate Spa Gene Expression. EMBO J. 2005, 24, 824–835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Painter, K.L.; Krishna, A.; Wigneshweraraj, S.; Edwards, A.M. What Role Does the Quorum-Sensing Accessory Gene Regulator System Play during Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia? Trends Microbiol. 2014, 22, 676–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Cheung, G.Y.C.; Joo, H.-S.; Chatterjee, S.S.; Otto, M. Phenol-Soluble Modulins--Critical Determinants of Staphylococcal Virulence. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 2014, 38, 698–719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Traber, K.E.; Lee, E.; Benson, S.; Corrigan, R.; Cantera, M.; Shopsin, B.; Novick, R.P. Agr Function in Clinical Staphylococcus aureus Isolates. Microbiology 2008, 154, 2265–2274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Gomes-Fernandes, M.; Laabei, M.; Pagan, N.; Hidalgo, J.; Molinos, S.; Villar Hernandez, R.; Domínguez-Villanueva, D.; Jenkins, A.T.A.; Lacoma, A.; Prat, C. Accessory Gene Regulator (Agr) Functionality in Staphylococcus aureus Derived from Lower Respiratory Tract Infections. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0175552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Kavanaugh, J.S.; Horswill, A.R. Impact of Environmental Cues on Staphylococcal Quorum Sensing and Biofilm Development. J. Biol. Chem. 2016, 291, 12556–12564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Thomsen, I.P.; Dumont, A.L.; James, D.B.A.; Yoong, P.; Saville, B.R.; Soper, N.; Torres, V.J.; Creech, C.B. Children with Invasive Staphylococcus aureus Disease Exhibit a Potently Neutralizing Antibody Response to the Cytotoxin LukAB. Infect. Immun. 2014, 82, 1234–1242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. He, L.; Le, K.Y.; Khan, B.A.; Nguyen, T.H.; Hunt, R.L.; Bae, J.S.; Kabat, J.; Zheng, Y.; Cheung, G.Y.C.; Li, M.; et al. Resistance to Leukocytes Ties Benefits of Quorum-Sensing Dysfunctionality to Biofilm Infection. Nat. Microbiol. 2019, 4, 1114–1119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Pérez, C.; Zúñiga, T.; Palavecino, C.E. Photodynamic Therapy for Treatment of Staphylococcus aureus Infections. Photodiagnosis Photodyn. Ther. 2021, 34, 102285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Sperandio, F.F.; Huang, Y.-Y.; Hamblin, M.R. Antimicrobial Photodynamic Therapy to Kill Gram-Negative Bacteria. Recent. Pat. Antiinfect. Drug Discov. 2013, 8, 108–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Manoharan, R.K.; Raorane, C.J.; Ishaque, F.; Ahn, Y.-H. Antimicrobial Photodynamic Inactivation of Wastewater Microorganisms by Halogenated Indole Derivative Capped Zinc Oxide. Environ. Res. 2022, 214, 113905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Aebisher, D.; Szpara, J.; Bartusik-Aebisher, D. Advances in Medicine: Photodynamic Therapy. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 8258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Wood, S.; Metcalf, D.; Devine, D.; Robinson, C. Erythrosine Is a Potential Photosensitizer for the Photodynamic Therapy of Oral Plaque Biofilms. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2006, 57, 680–684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Wu, H.; Zhang, Y.; Jiang, L.; Huang, H. Photodynamic Therapy with Photodegradable Photosensitizers. Chem. Commun. 2025, 61, 2627–2635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Correia, J.H.; Rodrigues, J.A.; Pimenta, S.; Dong, T.; Yang, Z. Photodynamic Therapy Review: Principles, Photosensitizers, Applications, and Future Directions. Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 1332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Hamblin, M.R.; Hasan, T. Photodynamic Therapy: A New Antimicrobial Approach to Infectious Disease? Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 2004, 3, 436–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Dai, T.; Fuchs, B.B.; Coleman, J.J.; Prates, R.A.; Astrakas, C.; St. Denis, T.G.; Ribeiro, M.S.; Mylonakis, E.; Hamblin, M.R.; Tegos, G.P. Concepts and Principles of Photodynamic Therapy as an Alternative Antifungal Discovery Platform. Front. Microbiol. 2012, 3, 120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Černáková, L.; Light, C.; Salehi, B.; Rogel-Castillo, C.; Victoriano, M.; Martorell, M.; Sharifi-Rad, J.; Martins, N.; Rodrigues, C.F. Novel Therapies for Biofilm-Based Candida Spp. Infections. Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 2019, 1214, 93–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Rapacka-Zdończyk, A.; Woźniak, A.; Michalska, K.; Pierański, M.; Ogonowska, P.; Grinholc, M.; Nakonieczna, J. Factors Determining the Susceptibility of Bacteria to Antibacterial Photodynamic Inactivation. Front. Med. 2021, 8, 642609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. FD&C Red No. 3. 2025. Available online: https://www.fda.gov/food/hfp-constituent-updates/fda-revoke-authorization-use-red-no-3-food-and-ingested-drugs (accessed on 30 May 2025).
  53. Bugyna, L.; Bilská, K.; Boháč, P.; Pribus, M.; Bujdák, J.; Bujdáková, H. Anti-Biofilm Effect of Hybrid Nanocomposite Functionalized with Erythrosine B on Staphylococcus aureus Due to Photodynamic Inactivation. Molecules 2024, 29, 3917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Bilská, K.; Bujdák, J.; Bujdáková, H. Nanocomposite System with Photoactive Phloxine B Eradicates Resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Heliyon 2024, 10, e33660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Dadi, N.C.t.; Dohál, M.; Medvecká, V.; Bujdák, J.; Koči, K.; Zahoranová, A.; Bujdáková, H. Physico-Chemical Characterization and Antimicrobial Properties of Hybrid Film Based on Saponite and Phloxine B. Molecules 2021, 26, 325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Skoura, E.; Boháč, P.; Barlog, M.; Pálková, H.; Mautner, A.; Bugyna, L.; Bujdáková, H.; Bujdák, J. Structure, Photoactivity, and Antimicrobial Properties of Phloxine B/Poly(Caprolactone) Nanocomposite Thin Films. Appl. Clay Sci. 2023, 242, 107037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Oliveira, D.; Borges, A.; Simões, M. Staphylococcus aureus Toxins and Their Molecular Activity in Infectious Diseases. Toxins 2018, 10, 252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Tong, S.Y.C.; Davis, J.S.; Eichenberger, E.; Holland, T.L.; Fowler, V.G. Staphylococcus aureus Infections: Epidemiology, Pathophysiology, Clinical Manifestations, and Management. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2015, 28, 603–661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Wu, X.; Wang, H.; Xiong, J.; Yang, G.-X.; Hu, J.-F.; Zhu, Q.; Chen, Z. Staphylococcus aureus Biofilm: Formulation, Regulatory, and Emerging Natural Products-Derived Therapeutics. Biofilm 2024, 7, 100175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Bronesky, D.; Wu, Z.; Marzi, S.; Walter, P.; Geissmann, T.; Moreau, K.; Vandenesch, F.; Caldelari, I.; Romby, P. Staphylococcus aureus RNAIII and Its Regulon Link Quorum Sensing, Stress Responses, Metabolic Adaptation, and Regulation of Virulence Gene Expression. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 2016, 70, 299–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Boisset, S.; Geissmann, T.; Huntzinger, E.; Fechter, P.; Bendridi, N.; Possedko, M.; Chevalier, C.; Helfer, A.C.; Benito, Y.; Jacquier, A.; et al. Staphylococcus aureus RNAIII Coordinately Represses the Synthesis of Virulence Factors and the Transcription Regulator Rot by an Antisense Mechanism. Genes Dev. 2007, 21, 1353–1366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Murray, E.J.; Williams, P. Detection of Agr-Type Autoinducing Peptides Produced by Staphylococcus aureus. In Quorum Sensing; Leoni, L., Rampioni, G., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2018; Volume 1673, pp. 89–96. ISBN 978-1-4939-7308-8. [Google Scholar]
  63. Garapati, C.; Clarke, B.; Zadora, S.; Burney, C.; Cameron, B.D.; Fournier, R.; Baugh, R.F.; Boddu, S.H.S. Development and Characterization of Erythrosine Nanoparticles with Potential for Treating Sinusitis Using Photodynamic Therapy. Photodiagn. Photodyn. Ther. 2015, 12, 9–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Yarwood, J.M.; Bartels, D.J.; Volper, E.M.; Greenberg, E.P. Quorum Sensing in Staphylococcus aureus Biofilms. J. Bacteriol. 2004, 186, 1838–1850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Kumar, K.; Chen, J.; Drlica, K.; Shopsin, B. Tuning of the Lethal Response to Multiple Stressors with a Single-Site Mutation during Clinical Infection by Staphylococcus aureus. mBio 2017, 8, e01476-17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Sun, F.; Liang, H.; Kong, X.; Xie, S.; Cho, H.; Deng, X.; Ji, Q.; Zhang, H.; Alvarez, S.; Hicks, L.M.; et al. Quorum-Sensing Agr Mediates Bacterial Oxidation Response via an Intramolecular Disulfide Redox Switch in the Response Regulator AgrA. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2012, 109, 9095–9100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Baković, J.; Yu, B.Y.K.; Silva, D.; Baczynska, M.; Peak-Chew, S.Y.; Switzer, A.; Burchell, L.; Wigneshweraraj, S.; Vandanashree, M.; Gopal, B.; et al. Redox Regulation of the Quorum-Sensing Transcription Factor AgrA by Coenzyme A. Antioxidants 2021, 10, 841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Hendiani, S.; Pornour, M.; Kashef, N. Sub-Lethal Antimicrobial Photodynamic Inactivation: An in Vitro Study on Quorum Sensing-Controlled Gene Expression of Pseudomonas Aeruginosa Biofilm Formation. Lasers Med. Sci. 2019, 34, 1159–1165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Pourhajibagher, M.; Mahmoudi, H.; Rezaei-soufi, L.; Alikhani, M.Y.; Bahador, A. Potentiation Effects of Antimicrobial Photodynamic Therapy on Quorum Sensing Genes Expression: A Promising Treatment for Multi-Species Bacterial Biofilms in Burn Wound Infections. Photodiagn. Photodyn. Ther. 2020, 30, 101717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Park, H.J.; Moon, Y.; Yoon, H.; Park, Y.M.; Yoon, J.; Bang, I.S. Agr Function Is Upregulated by Photodynamic Therapy for Staphylococcus aureus and Is Related to Resistance to Photodynamic Therapy. Microbiol. Immunol. 2013, 57, 547–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. George, S.E.; Hrubesch, J.; Breuing, I.; Vetter, N.; Korn, N.; Hennemann, K.; Bleul, L.; Willmann, M.; Ebner, P.; Götz, F.; et al. Oxidative Stress Drives the Selection of Quorum Sensing Mutants in the Staphylococcus aureus Population. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2019, 116, 19145–19154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Merritt, J.H.; Kadouri, D.E.; O’Toole, G.A. Growing and Analyzing Static Biofilms. Curr. Protoc. Microbiol. 2005, 22, 1B-1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Gaálová-Radochová, B.; Kendra, S.; Jordao, L.; Kursawe, L.; Kikhney, J.; Moter, A.; Bujdáková, H. Effect of Quorum Sensing Molecule Farnesol on Mixed Biofilms of Candida Albicans and Staphylococcus aureus. Antibiotics 2023, 12, 441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Theis, T.; Skurray, R.A.; Brown, M.H. Identification of Suitable Internal Controls to Study Expression of a Staphylococcus aureus Multidrug Resistance System by Quantitative Real-Time PCR. J. Microbiol. Methods 2007, 70, 355–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Livak, K.J.; Schmittgen, T.D. Analysis of Relative Gene Expression Data Using Real-Time Quantitative PCR and the 2−ΔΔCT Method. Methods 2001, 25, 402–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Antibiotics 14 01010 g001
Figure 1. The role of RNAIII in the regulation of virulence factors and biofilm formation in S. aureus. RNAIII activated by the agr system suppresses the expression of protein A (spa), coagulases (coa, vwb), adhesins (fnb), and biofilm formation, while promoting the expression of toxins (hla, hld), lipases (geh, lip), and serine proteases (ssp). Suppression of RNAIII leads to inhibition of the release of toxins, lipases, and proteases and the promotion of surface antigens that facilitate the formation of dense biofilm.
Figure 1. The role of RNAIII in the regulation of virulence factors and biofilm formation in S. aureus. RNAIII activated by the agr system suppresses the expression of protein A (spa), coagulases (coa, vwb), adhesins (fnb), and biofilm formation, while promoting the expression of toxins (hla, hld), lipases (geh, lip), and serine proteases (ssp). Suppression of RNAIII leads to inhibition of the release of toxins, lipases, and proteases and the promotion of surface antigens that facilitate the formation of dense biofilm.
Antibiotics 14 01010 g001
Antibiotics 14 01010 g002
Figure 2. Determination of the functionality of the agr QS system in S. aureus. (A) CAMP test, with arrows indicating expansion of the hemolysis zone as a result of δ-hemolysin production; (B) relative changes in the hld gene expression in planktonic cells of S. aureus strains of S66, S68, and S73 compared to standard strain CCM 3953, set to 1; the rpoD gene was used as the housekeeping gene. A p < 0.05 (*) was considered statistically significant and p < 0.0001 (****) extremely significant.
Figure 2. Determination of the functionality of the agr QS system in S. aureus. (A) CAMP test, with arrows indicating expansion of the hemolysis zone as a result of δ-hemolysin production; (B) relative changes in the hld gene expression in planktonic cells of S. aureus strains of S66, S68, and S73 compared to standard strain CCM 3953, set to 1; the rpoD gene was used as the housekeeping gene. A p < 0.05 (*) was considered statistically significant and p < 0.0001 (****) extremely significant.
Antibiotics 14 01010 g002
Antibiotics 14 01010 g003
Figure 3. Biofilm formation by agr-positive and agr-negative strains of S. aureus. (A) Evaluation of biofilm formation by crystal violet assay; (B) (above): light microscopy of native 24-h biofilms of tested strains; (bottom): fluorescence microscopy of 24-h biofilms formed on slides stained with DAPI. The magnification was 1000×. A p < 0.05 (*) was considered statistically significant and p < 0.001 (***) highly significant.
Figure 3. Biofilm formation by agr-positive and agr-negative strains of S. aureus. (A) Evaluation of biofilm formation by crystal violet assay; (B) (above): light microscopy of native 24-h biofilms of tested strains; (bottom): fluorescence microscopy of 24-h biofilms formed on slides stained with DAPI. The magnification was 1000×. A p < 0.05 (*) was considered statistically significant and p < 0.001 (***) highly significant.
Antibiotics 14 01010 g003
Antibiotics 14 01010 g004
Figure 4. Anti-biofilm effectiveness of nanocomposites against 24-h biofilms of clinical isolates of S. aureus S66, S68, and S73 before and after irradiation. The function was log10 (Ncontrol − Nsample); Ncontrol represents the number of CFU/mL on control PU material; Nsample represents the number of CFU/mL on PU material with modified surface (Sap/PDDA; Sap/PDDA/EryB). Control sample with EryB but cultivated in the dark is labeled dark, and sample irradiated with a green laser for 10 min is labeled light. A p < 0.01 (**) indicates very significant and p < 0.001 (***) highly significant.
Figure 4. Anti-biofilm effectiveness of nanocomposites against 24-h biofilms of clinical isolates of S. aureus S66, S68, and S73 before and after irradiation. The function was log10 (Ncontrol − Nsample); Ncontrol represents the number of CFU/mL on control PU material; Nsample represents the number of CFU/mL on PU material with modified surface (Sap/PDDA; Sap/PDDA/EryB). Control sample with EryB but cultivated in the dark is labeled dark, and sample irradiated with a green laser for 10 min is labeled light. A p < 0.01 (**) indicates very significant and p < 0.001 (***) highly significant.
Antibiotics 14 01010 g004
Antibiotics 14 01010 g005
Figure 5. Relative expression of the hld gene on nanomaterial in 24-h biofilms before and after irradiation. The red line represents the control S. aureus biofilm for each strain formed on PU alone (set as 1); the rpoD gene was used as a housekeeping gene. Control sample with EryB but cultivated in the dark is labeled dark, and sample irradiated with a green laser for 10 min is labeled light. A p > 0.05 (ns) was considered non-significant; p < 0.01 (**) was very significant; and p < 0.0001 (****) was extremely significant.
Figure 5. Relative expression of the hld gene on nanomaterial in 24-h biofilms before and after irradiation. The red line represents the control S. aureus biofilm for each strain formed on PU alone (set as 1); the rpoD gene was used as a housekeeping gene. Control sample with EryB but cultivated in the dark is labeled dark, and sample irradiated with a green laser for 10 min is labeled light. A p > 0.05 (ns) was considered non-significant; p < 0.01 (**) was very significant; and p < 0.0001 (****) was extremely significant.
Antibiotics 14 01010 g005
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Bugyna, L.; Švantner, Ľ.; Bilská, K.; Pribus, M.; Bujdáková, H. Impact of Light-Activated Nanocomposite with Erythrosine B on agr Quorum Sensing System in Staphylococcus aureus. Antibiotics 2025, 14, 1010. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics14101010

AMA Style

Bugyna L, Švantner Ľ, Bilská K, Pribus M, Bujdáková H. Impact of Light-Activated Nanocomposite with Erythrosine B on agr Quorum Sensing System in Staphylococcus aureus. Antibiotics. 2025; 14(10):1010. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics14101010

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bugyna, Larysa, Ľubomír Švantner, Katarína Bilská, Marek Pribus, and Helena Bujdáková. 2025. "Impact of Light-Activated Nanocomposite with Erythrosine B on agr Quorum Sensing System in Staphylococcus aureus" Antibiotics 14, no. 10: 1010. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics14101010

APA Style

Bugyna, L., Švantner, Ľ., Bilská, K., Pribus, M., & Bujdáková, H. (2025). Impact of Light-Activated Nanocomposite with Erythrosine B on agr Quorum Sensing System in Staphylococcus aureus. Antibiotics, 14(10), 1010. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics14101010

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop