Figures & data
Table 1 MIC Ranges and the Rates of Positive Efflux Pump, Mutation, and Resistance Genes for Linezolid, Tedizolid, and Radezolid Against 71 Linezolid-Resistance Enterococcus faecalis
Figure 1 MIC ranges and the rates of positive efflux pump, mutation, and resistance genes for linezolid, tedizolid, and radezolid against 71 linezolid-resistance Enterococcus faecalis (A) MICs; (B) carbonyl cyanide 3-chlorophenylhydrazone (CCCP) was used to detect the activity of efflux pumps; (C) the mutation of 23S rRNA and ribosomal proteins L3, L4, and L22; (D) the resistance genes of oxazolidinones; (E) the conjugation of resistance genes of oxazolidinones. Purple, Orange and blue squares represent positive, gray squares represent negative.
Figure 2 The effect of Linezolid, tedizolid, and radezolid to biofilms of Enterococcus faecalis. (A) The eradicated effect of Linezolid, tedizolid, and radezolid to established biofilms of Enterococcus faecalis. The 8 E. faecalis clinical isolates were allowed to form mature biofilms for 24 h, following which the established biofilms were treated with Linezolid, tedizolid, and radezolid (at 8 × their MICs for 48 h). The remaining biofilm biomass was determined by crystal violet staining. The inhibited effect of sub-minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) (1/4×MIC (B), 1/8×MIC (C), 1/16×MIC (D)) of linezolid, tedizolid and radezolid to Enterococcus faecalis biofilm formation. The 8 E. faecalis clinical isolates were treated with linezolid, tedizolid and radezolid at 1/4×their MICs for 24 h, and then biofilm biomass was determined by crystal violet staining. Data represent the average of three independent experiments (mean ± SD). *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 (Student’s t-test).
