Robust estimation of bacterial cell count from optical density

Journal Article (2020)
Author(s)

N.X. Bennis (TU Delft - BT/Industriele Microbiologie)

Susan E. Bouwmeester (Student TU Delft)

L.A. Büller (Student TU Delft)

K.A.A. Kohabir (TU Delft - Stichting SAM|XL)

Monique H.M. Melis (Nederlands Kanker Instituut - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek ziekenhuis)

Venda Mangkusaputra (Student TU Delft)

J.D.J. Mattens (Student TU Delft)

J.M. Nijenhuis (Student TU Delft)

T.W. Páez Watson (TU Delft - BT/Environmental Biotechnology)

More authors (External organisation)

Research Group
BT/Industriele Microbiologie
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-020-01127-5
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2020
Language
English
Research Group
BT/Industriele Microbiologie
Issue number
1
Volume number
3
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Optical density (OD) is widely used to estimate the density of cells in liquid culture, but cannot be compared between instruments without a standardized calibration protocol and is challenging to relate to actual cell count. We address this with an interlaboratory study comparing three simple, low-cost, and highly accessible OD calibration protocols across 244 laboratories, applied to eight strains of constitutive GFP-expressing E. coli. Based on our results, we recommend calibrating OD to estimated cell count using serial dilution of silica microspheres, which produces highly precise calibration (95.5% of residuals <1.2-fold), is easily assessed for quality control, also assesses instrument effective linear range, and can be combined with fluorescence calibration to obtain units of Molecules of Equivalent Fluorescein (MEFL) per cell, allowing direct comparison and data fusion with flow cytometry measurements: in our study, fluorescence per cell measurements showed only a 1.07-fold mean difference between plate reader and flow cytometry data.

Files

S42003-020-01127-5.pdf
(pdf | 1.48 Mb)
License info not available