Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Latest Articles
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • Topics
    • Applied and Environmental Science
    • Clinical Science and Epidemiology
    • Ecological and Evolutionary Science
    • Host-Microbe Biology
    • Molecular Biology and Physiology
    • Therapeutics and Prevention
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About mBio
    • Editor in Chief
    • Board of Editors
    • AAM Fellows
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
mBio
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Latest Articles
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • Topics
    • Applied and Environmental Science
    • Clinical Science and Epidemiology
    • Ecological and Evolutionary Science
    • Host-Microbe Biology
    • Molecular Biology and Physiology
    • Therapeutics and Prevention
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About mBio
    • Editor in Chief
    • Board of Editors
    • AAM Fellows
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
Research Article | Host-Microbe Biology

Experimental Human Challenge Defines Distinct Pneumococcal Kinetic Profiles and Mucosal Responses between Colonized and Non-Colonized Adults

Elissavet Nikolaou, Simon P. Jochems, Elena Mitsi, Sherin Pojar, Annie Blizard, Jesus Reiné, Carla Solórzano, Edessa Negera, Beatriz Carniel, Alessandra Soares-Schanoski, Victoria Connor, Hugh Adler, Seher R. Zaidi, Caz Hales, Helen Hill, Angie Hyder-Wright, Stephen B. Gordon, Jamie Rylance, Daniela M. Ferreira
N. Luisa Hiller, Editor
Elissavet Nikolaou
aDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Elissavet Nikolaou
Simon P. Jochems
aDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom
bDepartment of Parasitology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Elena Mitsi
aDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sherin Pojar
aDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Annie Blizard
aDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jesus Reiné
aDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Carla Solórzano
aDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Edessa Negera
aDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Beatriz Carniel
aDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alessandra Soares-Schanoski
cBacteriology Laboratory, Butantan Institute, São Paulo, Brazil
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Victoria Connor
aDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom
dDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hugh Adler
aDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom
dDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Hugh Adler
Seher R. Zaidi
aDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom
dDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Caz Hales
aDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom
dDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Helen Hill
aDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom
dDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Angie Hyder-Wright
aDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom
dDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Stephen B. Gordon
aDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom
eMalawi-Liverpool Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Programme, Blantyre, Malawi
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jamie Rylance
aDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom
dDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Daniela M. Ferreira
aDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
N. Luisa Hiller
Carnegie Mellon University
Roles: Editor
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/mBio.02020-20
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Supplemental Material
  • FIG 1
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG 1

    Kinetics of early pneumococcal detection in saliva. (A) Schematic representation of sample collection design. Saliva and NLF samples were collected before exposure, T = 0 h (baseline), in clinic. Volunteers were asked to self-collect saliva at 1, 2, 4, 8, 24, 36, and 48 h and NLF at 24 and 48 h post exposure. *, A subgroup of 33 individuals also collected NLF at 4 and 8 h post exposure to assess very early nasal microbiological and immunological dynamics. (B) Frequency of volunteers with detected S. pneumoniae 6B pneumococcus in saliva. Pneumococcal DNA presence in saliva was determined by S. pneumoniae (Spn) 6A/B qPCR. The number of volunteers with S. pneumoniae 6B presence (CT < 40) in each time point is expressed as a percentage (%) of the total number of volunteers for culture-positive and culture-negative groups in red and black, respectively. Statistical significance based on Fisher’s exact test. T = 1 h, ***, P = 0.0005; T = 24 h, **, P = 0.002; T = 36 h, *, P = 0.011; and T = 48 h, ****, P < 0.0001. (C) Heatmap showing individual saliva profiles. Presence of pneumococcal DNA detected from raw and/or culture-enriched extraction is depicted. Three distinct saliva profiles were defined. Culture-positive, volunteers who were identified to be experimentally colonized with pneumococcus at day 2 or later using classical microbiology (red, n = 21). Culture-negatives were divided into two groups as follows: saliva clearers, volunteers with detectable S. pneumoniae in saliva at 1 h after exposure (blue, n = 16) and nasal clearers, volunteers without detectable S. pneumoniae in saliva at 1 h after exposure (green, n = 24). (D) Density levels of pneumococcal 6A/B PCR in saliva (culture-positives, n = 21; saliva clearers, n = 16; and nasal clearers, n = 24). S. pneumoniae 6B density was expressed as DNA copies per volume (ml) of saliva. Only DNA from extractions without culture enrichment were included, as enrichment modifies density values (see also Fig. S2D). All samples with undetectable S. pneumoniae were set to 0 CFU/ml. Data were log transformed after adding 1 to all values to allow transformation of 0 values. Individual volunteers and the mean of log-transformed values are shown.

  • FIG 2
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG 2

    Kinetics of pneumococcal detection in nasal fluid following exposure. (A) Frequency of S. pneumoniae (Spn) DNA detection in nasal fluid after challenge, stratified by final colonization status (determined by conventional bacterial culture methods). NLF samples were collected before (T = 0) pneumococcal exposure and at 4, 8, 24, and 48 h post exposure. The number of volunteers with S. pneumoniae 6B presence in each time point is expressed as a percentage (%) of the total number of volunteers analyzed for culture-positives (red) and culture-negatives (black). (B) Individual-level DNA detection results, grouped by culture-positives (red, n = 20) and culture-negatives (n = 39). The latter group is subdivided into saliva clearers (blue, n = 15) and nasal clearers (green, n = 24). Samples not taken are highlighted in gray. (C) Density levels of pneumococcal 6A/B PCR in NLF, expressed as DNA copies per nasosorption device. If no S. pneumoniae was detected, the density was set as 0 CFU/ml. Data was log transformed after adding 1 to all values to allow transforming 0 values. Individual volunteers and the mean of log-transformed values are shown. (D) Levels of agglutination capacity in nasal wash at baseline in initial cohort. Nine culture-positive, 12 saliva clearer, and 17 nasal clearer volunteers were included in analysis. Each dot represents one volunteer. Mean ± standard error of the mean (SEM) is shown for each of the three groups.

  • FIG 3
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG 3

    Association of baseline mucosal immune factors with early pneumococcal colonization profiles. (A) Neutrophil number in nasal scrapes prior to pneumococcal exposure. Abundance of CD66b-high cells (activated granulocytes) at baseline were measured by flow cytometry. Eight culture-positives, 9 saliva clearers, and 14 nasal clearers were assessed (*, P = 0.018, unpaired t test). There is no statistically significant difference of the CD66bHi neutrophil counts between nasal and saliva clearers (P = 0.107, unpaired t test). Data were log transformed, and individual volunteers and mean ± SEM are represented. (B) MPO levels in nasal wash prior to pneumococcal exposure—both cohorts. MPO levels at baseline were measured by ELISA. Twenty-one culture-positives, 16 saliva clearers, and 24 nasal clearers were assessed. MPO levels in nasal wash were significantly increased in nasal clearers compared to those in culture-positives (*, P = 0.034, unpaired t test). Data were log transformed, and individual volunteers and mean ± SEM are represented. (C) Correlation between MPO levels in nasal wash and number of activated granulocytes (CD66bHi) in nasal scrapes prior to S. pneumoniae challenge for paired samples. Eight culture-positives, 9 saliva clearers, and 14 nasal clearers were assessed (Pearson test, r = 0.480; **, P = 0.006). Data were log transformed. Culture-positives, red circles; saliva clearers, blue rectangular; and nasal clearers, green squares. (D) MUC5AC in nasal wash at baseline. Each dot represents a volunteer, and mean ± SEM are shown. No statistical significance was detected within the groups (unpaired t test, culture-positives versus saliva clearers, P = 0.568; culture-positives versus nasal clearers, P = 0.112; saliva clearers versus nasal clearers, P = 0.250). (E) Levels of S. pneumoniae 6B polysaccharide-specific IgG (PS6B) antibodies in nasal wash at baseline. Each dot represents a volunteer, and mean ± SEM are shown. No statistical significance was detected within the groups (Mann-Whitney test, culture-positives versus saliva clearers, P = 0.722; culture-positives versus nasal clearers, P = 0.118; saliva clearers versus nasal clearers, P = 0.438). (F) Agglutination capacity (%) versus mucin (MUC5AC) in nasal wash at baseline. Culture-positives, red circles (n = 9); saliva clearers, blue rectangular (n = 7); and nasal clearers, green squares (n = 12). Data were log transformed, and Spearman rho and P values are depicted in addition to linear regression (black line). (G) Agglutination capacity (%) versus S. pneumoniae 6B polysaccharide-specific IgG (PS6B) antibody levels in nasal wash at baseline. Culture-positives, red circles (n = 9); saliva clearers, blue rectangular (n = 12); and nasal clearers, green squares (n = 17). Data were log transformed, and Spearman rho and P values are indicated.

  • FIG 4
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG 4

    Nasal immune factors during the first 48 h post exposure. (A) MPO levels in nasal lining fluid during the first 48 h measured by ELISA. Volunteer numbers assessed are indicated above the x axis per time point after exposure. Data were log transformed, and individuals and mean ± SEM are depicted. In culture-positives and saliva clearers, levels of MPO rose after exposure, peaking at 24 h after pneumococcal exposure (*, P = 0.016 and **, P = 0.006, respectively; paired t test to baseline). MPO baseline levels are statistically significantly different between nasal clearers and saliva clearers (*, P = 0.046, unpaired t test). (B) Cytokine profile heatmap in nasal lining fluid following S. pneumoniae challenge within the three groups. Concentrations of 30 cytokines was measured by Luminex at 4, 8, 24, and 48 h after pneumococcal exposure and normalized to baseline levels for each subject. The mean of log2-tranformed fold changes are shown per time point for each of the three groups. *, P < 0.05 based on paired t test comparing to baseline, followed by multiple testing correction (Benjamini-Hochberg). (C) Cytokine induction score in nasal lining fluid following S. pneumoniae challenge. A total cytokine induction score was calculated by summing the Z-score normalized to fold change for each of the measured cytokines. Paired volunteer numbers to baseline are indicated per time point after exposure (same numbers in Fig. 4B). Saliva clearers showed statistically significant total induction score of cytokines at 24 h postexposure compared to those of nasal clearers and culture-positives.

  • FIG 5
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG 5

    Summary model of findings. Schematic drawings of the nasopharynx are depicted for the three groups of individuals. Neutrophils, cytokines, and bacteria are depicted over time to illustrate the bacterial and immunological kinetics upon pneumococcal exposure.

Supplemental Material

  • Figures
  • TABLE S1

    Volunteer demographic data. Sixty-three volunteers aged 18 to 49 years, 41 culture-negatives and 22 culture-positives. Download Table S1, DOCX file, 0.01 MB.

    Copyright © 2021 Nikolaou et al.

    This content is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.

  • FIG S1

    Flow chart depicting the samples processing for pneumococcal detection in the study. Sixty-three healthy young adults age 18 to 49 years were recruited. Two volunteers were excluded from the initial cohort due to incorrect sample storage as detected by temperature monitoring, thus 61 volunteers were used in this analysis. Colonization status was defined by classical microbiology culture (blood agar plates with gentamycin) of S. pneumoniae serotype 6B in nasal wash samples collected before (day −5) and at days 2, 6, 9,14, 21, and 27 postexposure. Twenty-one volunteers were classified as culture-positives, as they had at least one positive sample at any time point during the study, whereas 40 volunteers had negative samples at all time points and were classified as culture-negatives. Saliva and NLF samples were obtained before exposure (time = 0 h, baseline, day of exposure) from all volunteers. Volunteers self-collected their own saliva at 1, 2, 4, 8, 24, 36, and 48 h and NLF (by nasosorption strip) at 24 and 48 h postexposure. Pneumococcal presence was detected in both saliva and NLF samples by extracting pneumococcal genomic DNA from raw material. In addition, for saliva samples, DNA was extracted from culture-enriched (CE) (blood agar plate with gentamicin) saliva samples. *, A subset of 33 volunteers self-collected in addition NLF samples at 4 and 8 h (66 samples) post exposure; these numbers are not included in this diagram. **, Samples from 7 volunteers (5 culture-positives, 40 samples; and 2 culture-negatives, 16 samples) were used for optimization experiments and were not included for culture-enriched extraction. From two of these seven volunteers (1 culture-positive, 3 samples; and 1 culture-negative, 3 samples), no bacterial DNA was extracted from NLF. Download FIG S1, DOCX file, 0.1 MB.

    Copyright © 2021 Nikolaou et al.

    This content is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.

  • FIG S2

    Home sampling of saliva and nasal lining fluid for S. pneumoniae detection. (A) Compliance monitoring for one example volunteer (v23). Temperature loggers were used to measure sample temperature, and recordings were taken every 20 s to ensure sample stability. Volunteers sent pictures of collected samples directly after sample collection to demonstrate that they were taken at the correct time. Planned times relative to experimental S. pneumoniae inoculation are shown and compared with the times of pictures for one representative volunteer. (B) Pie chart of compliance rates for all 63 volunteers. The number of corrected stored samples was counted per volunteer, expressed as percentage (%) of the total number of samples, and used to categorize compliance status. Compliance status was then expressed as percent compliance to the total number of volunteers. Excellent, 100% of samples stored at fridge/freezer; very good, 80 to 90% of samples stored at fridge/freezer; good, 70 to 80% of samples stored at fridge/freezer; and poor, ≤50% of samples stored at fridge/freezer from time of collection. (C) Venn diagram of S. pneumoniae detection using qPCR in culture-enriched saliva versus raw extracted saliva. Saliva samples from 7 volunteers (v4, v5, v7, v8, v9, v21, v38 with 17 positive S. pneumoniae timepoints) were excluded, as no culture-enrichment step was performed for these volunteers, and DNA from all material was already extracted before they were plated. (D) Comparison of S. pneumoniae 6B density from raw extracted and culture-enriched saliva samples. Open circles are samples detected by both methods (n = 27). S. pneumoniae density in samples detected by culture-enriched extraction was statistically significantly higher than that detected by raw DNA extraction (****, P < 0.0001, paired t test). Black circles are samples detected only by raw DNA extraction (n = 32), and grey circles are samples detected only by culture-enriched DNA extraction (n = 24). Download FIG S2, DOCX file, 0.2 MB.

    Copyright © 2021 Nikolaou et al.

    This content is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.

  • FIG S3

    Nasal immune and epithelial cells measured from nasal curettes at baseline. (A) Gating strategy for one representative volunteer. (B) Numbers of granulocytes at baseline. *, P = 0.038, unpaired t test. (C) Mean fluorescent intensity (MFI) of CD66b on granulocytes. *, P = 0.047, Mann-Whitney. (D) Numbers of B cells at baseline. (E) Numbers of T cells at baseline. (F) Numbers of epithelial cells at baseline. (G) Numbers of monocytes at baseline. Each dot represents a volunteer. Data were log transformed after adding 1 to all values to allow transforming 0 values and are represented as mean ± SEM. Download FIG S3, DOCX file, 0.4 MB.

    Copyright © 2021 Nikolaou et al.

    This content is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.

  • FIG S4

    Nasal cytokine levels prior to challenge. (A) Nasal cytokines at baseline. Mean and 95% confidence intervals are shown for log-transformed cytokine concentrations (pg/ml) for culture-positives (red), nasal clearers (green), and saliva clearers (blue) in nasosorption. (B) Correlation matrix showing the association between significantly induced cytokines and MPO levels in nasosorption at 24 h in saliva clearer and culture-positive groups. Non-highly significant correlations (P > 0.001, Spearman test) are left blank, and rho values are shown for each cytokine pair. Color and size reflect strength of a correlation. Download FIG S4, DOCX file, 0.3 MB.

    Copyright © 2021 Nikolaou et al.

    This content is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.

PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Experimental Human Challenge Defines Distinct Pneumococcal Kinetic Profiles and Mucosal Responses between Colonized and Non-Colonized Adults
Elissavet Nikolaou, Simon P. Jochems, Elena Mitsi, Sherin Pojar, Annie Blizard, Jesus Reiné, Carla Solórzano, Edessa Negera, Beatriz Carniel, Alessandra Soares-Schanoski, Victoria Connor, Hugh Adler, Seher R. Zaidi, Caz Hales, Helen Hill, Angie Hyder-Wright, Stephen B. Gordon, Jamie Rylance, Daniela M. Ferreira
mBio Jan 2021, 12 (1) e02020-20; DOI: 10.1128/mBio.02020-20

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this mBio article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Experimental Human Challenge Defines Distinct Pneumococcal Kinetic Profiles and Mucosal Responses between Colonized and Non-Colonized Adults
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from mBio
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in mBio.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Experimental Human Challenge Defines Distinct Pneumococcal Kinetic Profiles and Mucosal Responses between Colonized and Non-Colonized Adults
Elissavet Nikolaou, Simon P. Jochems, Elena Mitsi, Sherin Pojar, Annie Blizard, Jesus Reiné, Carla Solórzano, Edessa Negera, Beatriz Carniel, Alessandra Soares-Schanoski, Victoria Connor, Hugh Adler, Seher R. Zaidi, Caz Hales, Helen Hill, Angie Hyder-Wright, Stephen B. Gordon, Jamie Rylance, Daniela M. Ferreira
mBio Jan 2021, 12 (1) e02020-20; DOI: 10.1128/mBio.02020-20
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • INTRODUCTION
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

Streptococcus pneumoniae
colonization
saliva
nasal lining fluid
cytokines
neutrophil acquisition
host-pathogens interactions
controlled human infection

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About mBio
  • Editor in Chief
  • Board of Editors
  • AAM Fellows
  • Policies
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Author Warranty
  • Article Types
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #mBio

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Online ISSN: 2150-7511