Table 1.
Topography modifications and their biological efficacy to control growth/biofilm on surfaces.
| Surface | Inspiration & topography | Surface considered | Tested pathogens | Outcomes | Inference | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anti-bacterial | Psaltoda claripennis wings- nanostructured surface | Magicicada ssp.,(Brd II) Tibicen ssp., (DD), Pogomphus obscurus spp (DF) wings | 1. S.cerevasiae | 1. Reduced viability 2. Loss of membrane integrity |
1. Greater cell rupturing in higher aspect ratio nanoscale features (DD & DF) | (Pogodin et al., 2013; Nowlin et al., 2015) |
| Psaltoda claripennis wings- with longer & shaper nanopillar topography | - |
1. P.aeruginosa
2. S.aureus |
1. Killed 95% of P.aeruginosa & 83% of S.aureus | 1. Bactericidal efficiency higher than normal pillar topography due to high mechanical energy | (Ivanova et al., 2020) | |
| Nanopillar topography, with random spacing | Titanium black metal surface | 1. E. coli
2. P. aeruginosa, 3. M. smegmati 4. S. aureus |
1. Killed all tested pathogens (< 4h, 90% - 98%) except S.aureus
2. Less effect on S. aureus (22% - 4 h & 76% -24 h) 3. Proliferation of hMSCs |
1. High efficiency due to the different geometry of the nano architecture when compared to the cicada wing surface | (Hasan et al., 2017) | |
| Dragonflies & cicada wings - nanopillar topography | Titanium dioxide (TiO2) | 1. E. coli
2. K.pneumoniae 3. S. aureus |
1. Induced oxidative stress response 2. E. coli & K. pneumoniae (1000 fold reduction- < 6h) compared to S.aureus |
1. Penetrate into S. aureus at a lower frequency due to high turgor pressure & rigidity | (Jenkins et al., 2020) | |
| Nanoknives or nano blades | Graphene sheets | 1. E.coli
2. S.aureus |
1. E.coli less susceptible compared to S.aureus | 1. Due to the extra outer membrane in gram-positive bacteria | (Akhavan and Ghaderi, 2010) | |
| Anti-adhesive | Sharkskin - Sharklet micropatterned topography | poly(dimethyl siloxane) elastomer (PDMSe) | 1. S.aureus | 1. Sharklet AF™ prevented early biofilm colonisation (>21 days) | – | (Chung et al., 2007; Graham and Cady, 2014) |
| Sharklet micropattern | – |
1. S.aureus
2. P.aeruginosa |
1. Adherence was reduced (92.3 -99%) 2. Restricted transference (>90%) |
– | (Xu et al., 2017) | |
| Super-hydrophobic | Lotus leaf- air entrapment between the Micro/ nanostructures |
TiO2 nanotubes |
1. S.aureus
2. E.coli |
1. Prevents bacterial adherence & biofilm | – | (Patil et al., 2018) |
| 1H,1H,2H,2H-perfluorooctyltriethoxysilane, P25 TiO2 nanoparticles | 1. S.aureus
2. E.coli 3. MRSA 4742 |
1. Prevents bacterial attachment (<4h) 2. After 24 h 93–99% adherence |
1. Loss of air-bubble interface, less superhydrophobicity | (Hwang et al., 2018) | ||
| Cicada wings | – |
1. B. subtilis
2. B. catarrhalis 3. E. coli 4. P. maritimus 5. P. aeruginosa 6. P. fluorescens 7. S. aureus |
1. Irregular morphology in gram-negative bacteria exhibiting lethal conditions. 2. Morphologies remained unchanged in gram-positive |
1. Thick peptidoglycan layer provides rigidity to gram-positive bacteria | (Hasan et al., 2013) | |
| Slippery liquid-infused porous surface (SLIPS-omniphobic) | Nepenthes pitcher plant - Thin lubricating film coating | Polyfluoroalkyl- silanised enamel surface was infused with Fluorinert FC-70 lubricant | 1. S.mutans | 1. Sparse and isolated bacteria growth (24h) 2. Minimal growth by 48h. 3. Less dental plaque in SLIPS incisors |
1. Overcome the drawback of the superhydrophobic layer. 2. Lubricating thin film coating for the liquid droplets to slide away. |
(Yin et al., 2016) |
| – | Polycarbonate, polysulfone and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) tethered with liquid perfluorocarbon surface (TLP) |
1. E. coli
2. P. aeruginosa |
1. Suppressed biofouling & biofilm formation | – | (Leslie et al., 2014; Abdulkareem et al., 2022) | |
| Photocatalytic | – | Glass surfaces and glass microfibre filters coated with crystalline nanostructured TiO2 |
1. S.aureus
2. P.putida |
1. After 2 h of visible/near UV light irradiation cells 2. Membrane damage. |
1. Membrane damage due to ROS, intermediates of oxygen-dependent photosensitised reactions. | (Jalvo et al., 2017) |
| – | Phosphorus (P)- Fluorine (F) modified TiO2 |
1. E.coli
2. S. epidermidis 3. P. fluorescens |
1. Reduced colonisation (99%) | – | (Yan et al., 2020) | |
| – | copper (Cu)-doped TiO2 (Cu-TiO2) |
1. E.coli
2. S.aureus |
1. No significant change in the dark. 2. Bacterial reduction under visible light irradiation (5-Log reduction) |
– | (Mathew et al., 2018) | |
| Self-polishing | Prevention of biofouling on the marine hull | Alternative layer-by-layer (LbL) deposition of dextran aldehyde (Dex-CHO) and carboxymethyl chitosan (CMCS) on Stainless steel |
1. E.coli
2. S.aureus, 3. Amphora coffeaeformis |
1. Attachment & lethality were directly proportional to the number of assembled bilayers | 1. Increase in Dex-CHO/CMCS bilayers is directly proportional to surface hydrophilicity 2. Decrease in surface roughness, antimicrobial & antifouling surface |
(Xu et al., 2018) |