In addition, biofilm formation is not affected by NO produced by other NO-producing pathways, as neither the NO scavenger nor the addition of exogenous NO had an effect on mature biofilm structures. Previous studies have shown that cellular differentiation and biofilm formation in B. subtilis are controlled by intracellular concentrations of the phosphorylated master regulator Spo0A [14]. Two sensor kinases (KinA and KinC) that control the level of Spo0A phospohrylation possess cytoplasmic PAS sensor domains, which have been implicated to GDC-0449 research buy sense redox potential and O2. In turn, a mutational study of the cytoplasmic PAS domain of B. subtilis’ sensor kinase ResE suggested that it senses NO under anaerobic

conditions [28]. Thus, it is conceivable that KinA and KinC are affected by NO signalling. However, our study indicates that NOS-derived NO and exogenously supplied NO do not affect the PAS domains of KinA and KinC such that biofilm formation and differentiation is significantly altered. This

supports the notion that biofilm formation and differentiation in B. subtilis are rather controlled by specific extracellular molecules, such as signalling peptides [14], as opposed to more broad range redox-based signals like NO. NO is not involved in coordinating swarming of B. subtilis 3610 We tested the influence of NO and NOS activity on the swarming BTK inhibitor motility of B. subtilis 3610 on LB-based swarm agar (Figure 4). Swarm expansion of wild-type B. subtilis on 0.7% LB agar was 9 mm h-1 (± 0.8 mm) and agrees well with swarm expansion of 10 – 14 mm h-1 reported selleck chemicals by Kearns and Losick [13]. Swarm expansion was not significantly affected by the presence of NOS inhibitors, NO scavenger, NO donor and for the nos mutant. This shows that neither NOS-derived NO nor

exogenously supplied NO influences swarming motility in B. subtilis. Figure 4 Influence of NO and NO synthase (NOS) on the swarm rate of B. subtilis 3610. Swarm expansion DNA Damage inhibitor assays with strain 3610 wild-type (white bars) and strain 3610Δnos (gray bars) were performed on 0.7% LB agar without supplementation (controls) or supplemented with 100 μM L-NAME (NOS inhibitor), 100 μM c-PTIO (NO scavenger) and 20 μM or 200 μM Noc-18 (NO donor). Error bars indicate standard deviation (N = 6). Differences between individual dataset are not statistically significant (α = 0.01; see Material and Methods section for details). NOS-derived NO inhibits biofilm dispersal of B. subtilis 3610 We tested the influence of NOS-derived NO and exogenously supplied NO on the dispersal of B. subtilis 3610 from spot colony biofilms of wild-type and nos mutant cells (Figure 5A). First, biofilms were grown on MSgg agar or MSgg agar supplemented with NOS inhibitor or NO scavenger. To assay dispersal, we mounted a drop of MSgg medium containing a similar treatment as the underlying agar onto mature colony biofilms.