For 4 h (E) and 8 h (F); treated with 100 mg/L of EGCG and 4 mg/L of cefotaxime in combination for 4 h (G) and 8 h (H); and treated with 250 mg/L of EGCG and 4 mg/L of cefotaxime in combination for 4 h (I) and 8 h (J). Scale bar: 1 mm. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0048880.gsuch damages at 8 h (Rrms 2.460.6 nm, n = 20) (Figure 3D). The treatment of cefotaxime at 4 mg/L for 4 h mostly induced elongation (Figure 3E). Interestingly, elongated cells were able to maintain relatively smooth surfaces (Rrms 3.661.0 nm, n = 20) on their cell walls (Figure 3E). With the same treatment, some cellsAFM Study of Effects between EGCG and CefotaximeFigure 4. Oxidative stress response in ESBL-EC treated with sub-MICs of EGCG, cefotaxime or their combinations. Cells were either treated for 4 h (A) or 8 h (B). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0048880.gwere not elongated, but their surface was uneven as shown in supporting information (Figure S2B), and some other cells showed leakages with flattened 25331948 cell bodies (Figure S2C). At 8 h, cells restored their native rod shape (Figure 3F) with smooth surfaces (Rrms 1.460.5 nm, n = 20). When co-treated with cefotaxime (4 mg/L) and EGCG (100 mg/L), cells became elongated with large grooves and partial leakages on their cell walls at 4 h (Figure 3G), increasing their surface roughness (Rrms 22.069.5 nm, n = 20). At 8 h, more severe leakages were observed all along the cell body, and the damaged cells lost their cellular contents, leaving flattened cell bodies and extremely rough cell surfaces (Rrms 43.2612.6 nm, n = 20; Figure 3H). When treated with both cefotaxime (4 mg/L) and EGCG (250 mg/L), the leakage of vast cellular materials resulted in the partial flattening of cell bodies as well as increase in surface roughness (Rrms 40.067.3 nm, 21 n = 20) at 4 h (Figure 3I). At 8 h, the cell walls were totally collapsed, and severe cellular leakage caused flattening of the cells, leaving only empty envelopes (Figure 3J) and the highest roughness (Rrms 76.0614.1 nm, n = 20). AFM images of whole cells for each co-treatment can be found in the Supporting Information section (Figure S3A ?S3D).Oxidative Stress Level in ESBL-EC Treated with Cefotaxime and EGCGDHR was used as an indicator of intracellular H2O2 [23?6]. At both 4 h and 8 h, buy 115103-85-0 bacterial cells co-treated with EGCG and cefotaxime showed higher oxidative stress response than those treated with either EGCG or cefotaxime (Figure 4A and 4B). The cells with any of the treatments for 4 h showed higher oxidative stress response than those at 8 h (Figure 4A and 4B), indicating that antibacterial effects of all the treatment decrease over time.DiscussionThe sole treatment of either cefotaxime or EGCG at sub-MICs temporarily inhibits ESBL-EC. The cefotaxime induced filamentation in the cells. Filamentation is a typical feature of the morphological change induced by b-lactam antibiotics against Gram-negative bacteria [15], [27]. It was reported that b-lactam antibiotics induced SOS response in E. coli. During the SOS response, bacteria stop dividing and become filamentated. As a result, filamentated bacteria were able to survive under the selective MedChemExpress SPI 1005 pressure of b-lactam antibiotics [2], [27]. Similarly, filamenated cells were observed at 4 h after cefotaxime treatment, as shown in Figure 2C and 3E. Neither damages nor leakage were observed in the filamentated cells (Figure 3E and S2A), indicatingthat the cell walls maintained integrity during filamentation. ESBL-EC can obtain resistance to c.For 4 h (E) and 8 h (F); treated with 100 mg/L of EGCG and 4 mg/L of cefotaxime in combination for 4 h (G) and 8 h (H); and treated with 250 mg/L of EGCG and 4 mg/L of cefotaxime in combination for 4 h (I) and 8 h (J). Scale bar: 1 mm. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0048880.gsuch damages at 8 h (Rrms 2.460.6 nm, n = 20) (Figure 3D). The treatment of cefotaxime at 4 mg/L for 4 h mostly induced elongation (Figure 3E). Interestingly, elongated cells were able to maintain relatively smooth surfaces (Rrms 3.661.0 nm, n = 20) on their cell walls (Figure 3E). With the same treatment, some cellsAFM Study of Effects between EGCG and CefotaximeFigure 4. Oxidative stress response in ESBL-EC treated with sub-MICs of EGCG, cefotaxime or their combinations. Cells were either treated for 4 h (A) or 8 h (B). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0048880.gwere not elongated, but their surface was uneven as shown in supporting information (Figure S2B), and some other cells showed leakages with flattened 25331948 cell bodies (Figure S2C). At 8 h, cells restored their native rod shape (Figure 3F) with smooth surfaces (Rrms 1.460.5 nm, n = 20). When co-treated with cefotaxime (4 mg/L) and EGCG (100 mg/L), cells became elongated with large grooves and partial leakages on their cell walls at 4 h (Figure 3G), increasing their surface roughness (Rrms 22.069.5 nm, n = 20). At 8 h, more severe leakages were observed all along the cell body, and the damaged cells lost their cellular contents, leaving flattened cell bodies and extremely rough cell surfaces (Rrms 43.2612.6 nm, n = 20; Figure 3H). When treated with both cefotaxime (4 mg/L) and EGCG (250 mg/L), the leakage of vast cellular materials resulted in the partial flattening of cell bodies as well as increase in surface roughness (Rrms 40.067.3 nm, 21 n = 20) at 4 h (Figure 3I). At 8 h, the cell walls were totally collapsed, and severe cellular leakage caused flattening of the cells, leaving only empty envelopes (Figure 3J) and the highest roughness (Rrms 76.0614.1 nm, n = 20). AFM images of whole cells for each co-treatment can be found in the Supporting Information section (Figure S3A ?S3D).Oxidative Stress Level in ESBL-EC Treated with Cefotaxime and EGCGDHR was used as an indicator of intracellular H2O2 [23?6]. At both 4 h and 8 h, bacterial cells co-treated with EGCG and cefotaxime showed higher oxidative stress response than those treated with either EGCG or cefotaxime (Figure 4A and 4B). The cells with any of the treatments for 4 h showed higher oxidative stress response than those at 8 h (Figure 4A and 4B), indicating that antibacterial effects of all the treatment decrease over time.DiscussionThe sole treatment of either cefotaxime or EGCG at sub-MICs temporarily inhibits ESBL-EC. The cefotaxime induced filamentation in the cells. Filamentation is a typical feature of the morphological change induced by b-lactam antibiotics against Gram-negative bacteria [15], [27]. It was reported that b-lactam antibiotics induced SOS response in E. coli. During the SOS response, bacteria stop dividing and become filamentated. As a result, filamentated bacteria were able to survive under the selective pressure of b-lactam antibiotics [2], [27]. Similarly, filamenated cells were observed at 4 h after cefotaxime treatment, as shown in Figure 2C and 3E. Neither damages nor leakage were observed in the filamentated cells (Figure 3E and S2A), indicatingthat the cell walls maintained integrity during filamentation. ESBL-EC can obtain resistance to c.