Table 1.
Mechanism | Fungi | Bacteria | Relationship | Study Setting | References |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Physical
Interaction |
Aspergillus spp. | K. pneumoniae | antagonism | In vitro co-culture → prevention of spore germination and filamentation |
[55] |
A. fumigatus | P. aeruginosa | antagonism | In vitro co-culture → decreased filamentation, biofilm formation, and conidia biomass |
[56] | |
C. albicans | A. baumannii | antagonism | In vitro co-culture → induced fungal apoptosis |
[57] | |
F. nucleatum | antagonism | In vitro co-culture → inhibited growth and filamentation |
[58] | ||
Group B Streptococcus | synergism | In vitro: vaginal epithelial cells → enhanced fungal and bacterial adhesion |
[59] | ||
P. aeruginosa | antagonism | In vitro co-cultures → killing of filamentous fungus |
[60,61] | ||
S. aureus | synergism | Ex vivo mouse tongue infection [62]; in vivo oral mouse co-infection [63]; in vivo oral mouse infection [64] → promoted bacterial invasion |
[62,63,64] | ||
S. epidermidis | non-competitive | In vitro adhesion model → bacteria bind to fungal germtubes |
[65] | ||
S. gordonii | non-competitive | In vitro co-aggregation assays → C. albicans adhesin binds bacterial cell wall proteins |
[66,67,68] | ||
Chemical
Interaction and Release of Metabolic Byproducts |
A. fumigatus | A. baumannii | antagonism | Gliotoxin treated bacterial biofilm → decreased bacterial biomass |
[69] |
P. aeruginosa | antagonism | In vitro co-culture → inhibited fungal biofilm formation [56]; Gliotoxin treated bacterial biofilm → decreased bacterial biomass [69]; In vitro assay → inhibited fungal growth [70] |
[56,69,70] | ||
S. aureus | antagonism | Gliotoxin-treated bacterial biofilm → decreased bacterial biomass |
[69] | ||
C. albicans | A. actinomycetemcomitans | antagonism | In vitro co-culture → AI-2 inhibits fungal biofilm formation |
[71] | |
C. difficile | antagonism | In vitro assay → p-cresol involved in filamentation |
[72] | ||
E. coli | antagonism | In vitro biofilm assay → inhibited fungal biofilm formation [73]; In vitro assay → soluble factor kills C. albicans [74] |
[73,74] | ||
E. faecalis | antagonism | In vitro biofilm model, in vivo nematode model, in vivo murine candidiasis model [75]; In vivo nematode model, in vitro biofiolm model [76] → inhibition of filamentation and fungal virulence |
[75,76] | ||
Lactobacillus spp. | antagonism | In vitro: HeLa cells → reduced fungal adhesion [77]; In vitro C. albicans growth → stimulation of pseudohyphae and repression of growth [78]; In vitro model: vaginal epithelial cells → bactericidal mode against C. albicans [79]; In vitro co-culture → inhibition of filamentation [80] |
[77,78,79,80] | ||
P. aeruginosa | antagonism | In vitro assay → inhibition of fungal growth [70]; In vitro co-culture → decreased bacterial virulence [81]; In vitro co-culture → reduces fungal viability [82] |
[70,81,82] | ||
S. aureus | synergism | In vitro assay → enhanced tolerance to antimicrobial compounds |
[83] | ||
S. gordonii | synergism | In vitro assay → enhanced filamentation |
[68] | ||
S. mutans | synergism antagonism |
In vitro assay → enhanced bacterial growth [84]; In vitro co-culture → inhibited filamentation [85,86] |
[84] [85,86] |
||
S. enterica serovar Typhimurium | antagonism | In vivo nematode model, in vitro co-culture → repressed filamentation |
[87] | ||
C. neoformans | K. aerogenes | synergism | In vitro co-culture → promoted fungal melanization |
[88] | |
S. cerevisiae | Acinetobacter spp. | synergism | In vitro co-culture, in vivo nematode model → enhanced bacterial growth and increased pathogenicity |
[89] | |
Influencing the Environment | C. albicans | B. fragilis | synergism | In vitro assay → protection of bacteria by fungal biofilm |
[90] |
C. difficile | synergism | In vitro co-culture → anaerobic growth of C. difficile |
[72] | ||
C. perfringens | synergism | In vitro assay → protection by fungal biofilm |
[90] | ||
Competition | C. albicans | Lactobacillus spp. | antagonism | In vitro model: vaginal epithelial cells → reduced bacterial adherence |
[79,91,92,93] |
S. mitis | antagonism | In vitro co-culture in a chemostat → competition for glucose |
[94] | ||
S. sobrinus | antagonism | In vitro co-culture in a chemostat → competition for glucose |
[94] | ||
Biofilm Formation | C. albicans | A. actinomycetemcomitans | antagonism | In vitro Bioflux assay → decreased fungal biofilm formation |
[71] |
C. freundii | non-competitive | In vitro co-culture → ability to form mixed biofilms |
[95] | ||
C. perfringens | synergism | In vitro assay → protection by fungal biofilm |
[90] | ||
E. coli | synergism | In vitro assay → increased mixed biofilm formation |
[96] | ||
E. faecalis | synergism | In vitro assay → increased mixed biofilm formation |
[97] | ||
K. pneumoniae | antagonism | In vitro assay → decreased fungal biofilm formation |
[90,98] | ||
P. aeruginosa | antagonism | In vitro assay → decreased fungal biofilm formation |
[60,99] | ||
P. gingivalis | synergism | In vitro assay → protection by fungal biofilm |
[100] | ||
S. aureus | synergism | In vitro assay → increased mixed biofilm formation |
[83,101,102,103] | ||
S. epidermidis | synergism | In vitro co-culture → increased mixed biofilm formation |
[104,105] | ||
Streptococcus spp. | synergism | In vitro model: oral epithelial cells [106]; In vivo oral mouse model [107]; In vitro assay, in vivo oral rat model [108,109] → increased mixed biofilm formation |
[106,107,108,109] | ||
C. tropicalis | E. coli | synergism | In vitro assay → increased mixed biofilm formation |
[20] | |
S. marcescens | synergism | In vitro assay → increased mixed biofilm formation |
[20] | ||
T. asahii | S. simulans | non-competitive | In vitro co-culture → ability to form mixed biofilms |
[95] |