Saliva: An Oral Microbial

Modulating Agent

by

Ajeigbe Yekeen Abiola





IN PARTIAL FULFILMMENT OF THE AWARD OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF
BACHELOR OR SCIENCE B.Sc. DEGREE IN
MICROBIOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF ILORIN,
KWARA STATE, NIGERIA.



Page | 2

2



Table of Contents
Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................................... 2
Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 4
1.1 Salivary Glands .................................................................................................................................... 6
1.2 Oral Microbiota & General Health ...................................................................................................... 7
Chapter 2: General Functions of Saliva ...................................................................................................... 11
2.1 Taste .............................................................................................................................................. 11
2.2 Physical-Mechanical Activities (Lubrication, Dilution, Flushing and Cleaning Of Oral Cavity) 12
2.3 Modulation of the oral microbiota ................................................................................................ 14
2.4 Maintaining the integrity of the tooth enamel ............................................................................... 14
2.5 Buffer for the oral cavity ............................................................................................................... 15
2.6 Digestion ....................................................................................................................................... 17
2.7 Tissue Repair ................................................................................................................................ 17
Chapter 3: Major Components of the Salivary Pellicle .............................................................................. 18
3.0 Albumin ........................................................................................................................................ 20
3.1 Digestive Components of the Salivary Pellicle ................................................................................. 20
3.1.1 Amylase ..................................................................................................................................... 20
3.2 Buffering Components of the Salivary Pellicle ................................................................................ 20
3.2.1 Carbonic anhydrase (CA) ........................................................................................................... 20
3.3 Immunoactive/Immunologic Components of the Salivary Pellicle .................................................. 22
3.3.1 Cystatins ..................................................................................................................................... 22
3.3.2 Histatins ..................................................................................................................................... 23
3.3.3 Lactoferrin .................................................................................................................................. 24
3.3.4 Lysozyme ................................................................................................................................... 28
3.3.5 Peroxidase .................................................................................................................................. 30
3.3.6 Proline-rich Proteins (PRPs) ...................................................................................................... 31


Page | 3

3
3.3.7 Mucin-glycoprotein 1 and 2 (MG 1 & 2) ................................................................................... 31
3.3.8 Secretory Immunoglobulin A (SIgA)......................................................................................... 34
3.3.9 Statherin ..................................................................................................................................... 40
3.4 Summary of Immunoactive Components of the Saliva .................................................................... 40
Chapter 4: Inactivation of salivary defenses ............................................................................................... 42
4.1 Salivary Flow and Factors Affecting It ............................................................................................. 42
4.2 Effects of Reduced Salivary Flow .................................................................................................... 43
4.3 Saliva and Dental Caries Formation .................................................................................................. 45
References ................................................................................................................................................... 48




Page | 4

4
Chapter 1: Introduction
The mouth is the gateway of the body to the external world and represents one of the most bio-
logically complex and significant sites in the body. Saliva (also referred to as spit, spittle, drool
or slobber) is a watery, sometimes frothy fluid found in the oral cavity of Homo sapiens. Whole
saliva is a dilute, viscous solution. Around 0.5 to 1.5 liters of saliva are secreted into the mouth
each day.
Saliva is hypotonic, with an average pH of around 6.7. Saliva contains both organic compounds
(23 g/l protein, notably the enzyme amylase), and inorganic compounds including the electro-
lytes: bicarbonate, chloride, potassium and sodium (Lamont and Jenkinson, 2010). In a healthy
mouth, the mean volume of saliva ranges from approximately 1.07mL before swallowing to ap-
proximately 0.77mL after swallowing (Dawes, 2004), total daily flow of saliva ranges from 500
mL to 1.5L (Jensen et al., 2003: Humphrey and Williamson, 2003). While much is known about
the digestive properties of saliva, the other roles of saliva and especially its role as part of the
immune system has not been widely publicized or acknowledged despite quite a lot of research
in this field. Human saliva not only lubricates the oral tissues, making oral functions such as
speaking, eating, and swallowing possible, but also protects teeth and oral mucosal surfaces in
different ways. The lubricating and antimicrobial functions of saliva are maintained mainly by
resting saliva. Stimulation of saliva results in a flushing effect and the clearance of oral debris
and noxious agents. However, the protective functions of saliva are not limited to the above-
mentioned functions (Jensen et al., 2003: Humphrey and Williamson, 2003).
Recent studies have revealed a large number of functions, mediated by both the inorganic and
organic components of saliva that should be considered in assessments of the effects of human
saliva on dental caries. Some of these studies have introduced a new approach to dental car-

Page | 5

5
ies from being a bacterially induced multifactorial disease to a disease which may also be
influenced by inherited salivary factors. Such genetically regulated salivary components may
influence both the colonization and the clearance of micro-organisms from the oral cavity (Jen-
sen et al., 2003: Humphrey and Williamson, 2003).
Saliva can provide growth nutrients for bacteria. Various bacteria produce proteases that degrade
salivary proteins into peptides and amino acids, which can be used by the bacteria when exoge-
nous nutrients are limiting. Bacteria can also produce glycan hydrolases that cleave sugar resi-
dues from the salivary glycoproteins, so that the sugars can be used for bacterial growth. Again,
through co-evolution the bacteria that readily colonize and grow in saliva are mostly harmless
and may help exclude pathogens (Lamont and Jenkinson, 2010).
The secretion of saliva also provides a mechanism whereby certain organic and inorganic sub-
stances can be excreted from the body, including mercury, lead, potassium iodide, bromide,
morphine, ethyl alcohol, and certain antibiotics such as penicillin, streptomycin, and chlortetra-
cycline (Jensen et al., 2003: Humphrey and Williamson, 2003).
At present, due to its role in the oral cavity, saliva represents an increasingly useful auxiliary
means of diagnosis (Mahmud, 2003). Many researchers have made use of sialometry and sialo-
chemistry to diagnose systemic illnesses, monitoring general health, and as an indicator of risk
for diseases creating a close relation between oral and systemic health (Gonzales and Sanchez,
2003). However, since several factors can influence salivary secretion and composition a strictly
standardized collection must be made so the above-mentioned exams are able to reflect the real
functioning of the salivary glands and serve as an efficient means for monitoring health
(Mahmud, 2003).

Page | 6

6
Fig 1: The location of salivary glands in the oral cavity
Source; Britannica, 2003
1.1 Salivary Glands
Saliva is secreted by three (3) major
salivary glands namely parotid, sub-
mandibular and sub-lingual (Fig 1)
and these secrete about 90% of the
saliva in the mouth. Hundreds of mi-
nor salivary glands also secrete saliva
and these accounts for the remaining
10% of saliva in the oral cavity. Minor
salivary glands include the lingual, la-
bial, buccal, palatine and glossopalatine (Pedersen et al., 2002: Humphrey and Williamson,
2001: Cassolato and Turnbull, 2001).
The parotid ducts/gland is located in the cheeks and supplies a fluid containing bicarbonate and
phosphate ions, agglutinins (glycoproteins), -amylase, proline-rich proteins and other proteins
& glycoproteins. S-IgA is also produced in the parotid ducts by plasma cells that localize there
from the bone marrows (Lamont and Jenkinson, 2010).
The sub-mandibular gland produce between 60-70% of the saliva in the oral cavity which con-
tains mucous and serum derived (serous) components.
The sub-lingual glands located anterior to the sub-mandibular glands produce mainly mucous
secretions.
Salivary secretions are classified as serous (primarily from the parotid glands), mucous (from the
minor salivary glands), or mixed (from the submandibular and sublingual glands). As their

Page | 7

7
names imply, serous secretions contain more water than the viscous saliva produced by mucous
glands (Jensen et al., 2003: Pedersen et al., 2002).

1.2 Oral Microbiota & General Health
The oral cavity is the most complex and the most accessible microbial ecosystem of the human
body. The teeth, gingivae (gums), tongue, throat and buccal mucosa (cheeks) all provide differ-
ent surfaces for microbial colonization. The constant production of saliva and intermittent provi-
sion of sugars and amino acids from ingested food provides nutrients for microbial growth. The
human oral cavity is home to about 700 identified species of bacteria. This number will probably
turn out to be closer to 1000 in the future, when all taxa and phyla have been recorded (Patricia
et al., 2008). It is also home to at least 30 species of fungi (mainly of the genus Candida), several
species of protozoa (which graze on the bacteria for food), and various intracellular viruses.
Generally, in a single subject it is usual to find between 2050 species of bacteria at healthy oral
Fig 2: Gland contribution of unstimulated salivary flow
Source: Patricia et al., 2008

Page | 8

8
sites. At diseased sites there is a tendency for higher numbers of different species to be present,
perhaps 200 or more (Lamont and Jenkinson, 2010).
The organisms present in the oral cavity are a mixture of commensals and pathogens. A com-
mensal microorganism is defined as one that lives on or within a host but does not cause any ap-
parent disease. However, this terminology may be misleading, as many commensal bacteria can,
under certain conditions, be associated with human disease. Subjects whose immune systems are
not working optimally, i.e. immunocompromised, are especially susceptible to infections by mi-
crobes that are commensal in healthy individuals. For these reasons, commensals are nowadays
often referred to as opportunistic pathogens.
Many of the cultivated bacteria present in the mouth probably contribute to oral diseases to a
greater or lesser extent, because these diseases are almost always associated with polymicrobial
infections. Monospecies infections are rare; however, localized aggressive periodontitis (LAP) is
predominantly associated with Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, while Actinomyces is-
raelii can cause oral cysts. Overt pathogens are organisms that usually cause disease when pre-
sent, unless the host has protective immunity. There are very few organisms in the oral cavity
and nasopharynx that can be considered overt pathogens. Streptococcus pyogenes (Group A
Streptococcus), Streptococcus pneumoniae (Pneumococcus), Neisseria meningitidis (Meningo-
cocccus) and Haemophilus influenzae all reside within the nasopharynx and have the potential to
cause life-threatening diseases. It is important to note, however, that even in such cases these
bacteria may also be carried by subjects with no overt signs of disease. This is termed the carrier
state (Lamont and Jenkinson, 2010).

Page | 9

9
Almost every member of the human population is afflicted at some stage of their lives with an
oral disease. The incidence of dental caries has declined generally in the developed world, due in
part to fluoride in the water supply, in toothpaste, or taken in tablet form. However there are
many groups within locales such as in Sub Saharan Africa that are still seriously afflicted with
caries. Polymicrobial infections of the gingivae and sub-gingival regions (periodontitis, implanti-
tis and pulpitis) are major conditions requiring clinical intervention. These diseases impose a
significant burden on the health care system of such places (Lamont and Jenkinson, 2010).
Table 1: Important Oral Diseases, their manifestations and microorganisms implicated
Disease Description Microorganisms implicated
Caries Decay (loss) of tooth enamel (dental caries)
or dentin (dentinal caries), or root dentin (root
caries)
Streptococcus, Lactobacillus,
Actinomyces (root caries)
Gingivitis Redness and swelling (inflammation) of the
gingival tissues (gums)
Actinomyces, Fusobacterium,
Bacteroides, Prevotella
Periodontitis Inflammation and either rapid (aggressive,
either generalized or localized) or slower
(chronic) destruction of the tissues supporting
the tooth
Aggregatibacter (localized),
Porphyromonas, Treponema,
Tannerella, Fusobacterium,
Prevotella
Implantitis Infection and destruction of tissues surround-
ing a dental titanium implant
Staphylococcus, Pseudomo-
nas, Porphyromonas,
Prevotella
Pulpitis Infection of the pulp, inflammation around Fusobacterium, Dialister,

Page | 10

1
0
the apex of the root, leading to abscess for-
mation (periapical granuloma)
Peptostreptococcus, Porphy-
romonas
Halitosis Oral malodor Fusobacterium, Porphyromo-
nas, Prevotella, Treponema,
Eubacterium
Pharyngitis Redness and inflammation of the pharynx. Group A Streptococcus, Neis-
seria, Haemophilus, Coxsack-
ie A virus
Tonsillitis Infection and inflammation of the tonsils. Group A Streptococcus, Hae-
mophilus
Leukoplakia White patches on the buccal mucosal epithe-
lium or tongue
Candida, human papilloma
virus (HPV)
Stomatitis Reddening and inflammation of the oral mu-
cosa
Candida albicans, Candida
tropicalis, other Candida spe-
cies.
Actinomycosis Hard swelling (cyst) within the gums Actinomyces israelii
Cold sores Surface (superficial) red, dry lesions close to
the lips
Herpes smplex virus (HSV)
Source: Lamont and Jenkinson, 2010.


Page | 11

1
1
Chapter 2: General Functions of Saliva
The saliva carries out a lot of activities in the oral cavity due to the actions of the components
salivary pellicle. A summary of the functions of saliva with some of the active components are
shown in Fig 3 below:


2.1 Taste
The salivary flow initially formed inside the acini is isotonic with respect to plasma. However, as
it runs through the network of ducts, it becomes hypotonic (Washington et al., 2000; Dawes et
al., 2004; Turner and Sugiya, 2002; Constanzo, 2004). The hypotonicity of saliva (low levels of
Abbreviations: Ca
2+
= calcium; PRG = proline-rich glycoprotein; PRPs = proline-rich proteins; SLPI
= secretory leukocyte protease inhibitor; VEGh = Von Ebner glands protein; Zn
2+
= zinc
Fig 3: Summary of functions of saliva in oral cavity
Source: Brosky, 2007

Page | 12

1
2
glucose, sodium, chloride, and urea) and its capacity to provide the dissolution of substances al-
lows the gustatory buds to perceive different flavors. Gustin, a salivary protein, appears to be
necessary for the growth and maturation of these buds (Berkovitz et al., 2002; Humphrey and
Williamson, 2001; Cate, 1998; Stack and Papas, 2001).
2.2 Physical-Mechanical Activities (Lubrication, Dilution, Flushing and Cleaning Of Oral
Cavity)
Saliva is responsible for flushing the epithelial surfaces and for lubrication and protection of tis-
sues and an adequate flow of saliva is essential for the maintenance of both hard and soft tissue
integrity.
Saliva forms a seromucosal covering that lubricates and protects the oral tissues against irritating
agents (Stack and Papas, 2001; Nagler, 2004). Human saliva lubricates the oral tissues, making
oral functions such as speaking, eating, and swallowing possible. The lubricating and antimicro-
bial functions of saliva are maintained mainly by resting saliva. Stimulation of saliva results in a
flushing effect and the clearance of oral debris and noxious agents.

Page | 13

1
3

Mastication, speech, and deglutition are also aided by the lubricant effects of the proteins (mu-
cins) present in saliva (Berkovitz et al., 2002; Edgar, 1992; Tenovuo 1994; Nagler 2004; Tabak
et al., 2982; Schenkels et al., 1995; Amerongen and Veerman, 2002).
In addition to diluting substances, its fluid consistency provides mechanical cleansing of the res-
idues present in the mouth such as nonadherent bacteria and cellular and food debris.
Salivary flow tends to eliminate excess carbohydrates, thus, limiting the availability of sugars to
the biofilm microorganisms. The greater the salivary flow, the greater the cleaning and diluting
capacity; therefore, if changes in health status cause a reduction in salivary flow, there would be
a drastic alteration in the level of oral cleaning (Tenovuo and Lagerlof, 1994; Douglas, 2002;
Cate, 1998; Stack and Papas, 2001; Nagler, 2004).
Fig 4: Illustration of salivary seromucosal covering
Source: Patricia et al., 2008

Page | 14

1
4
2.3 Modulation of the oral microbiota
Saliva contains anti-microbial components such as lysozymes, S-IgA, mucins, salivary histatins
etc. which functions as part of an innate defense system which is non-specific and always active.
This properties are further discussed under the components of saliva.
2.4 Maintaining the integrity of the tooth enamel
Saliva plays a fundamental role in maintaining the physical-chemical integrity of tooth enamel
by modulating remineralization and demineralization. The main factors controlling the stability
of enamel hydroxyapatite are the active concentrations free of calcium, phosphate, and fluoride
in solution and the salivary pH (Axelsson, 2000; Larsen and Bruun, 2001).
The high concentrations of calcium and phosphate in saliva guarantee ionic exchanges directed
towards the tooth surfaces that begin with tooth eruption resulting in post-eruptive maturation.
Remineralization of a carious tooth before cavitation occurs is possible, mainly due to the avail-
ability of calcium and phosphate ions in saliva (Tenovuo and Lagerlof 2000; Cate, 1998; Stack
and Papas, 2001).
The concentration of salivary calcium varies with the salivary flow (Tenovuo and Lagerlof 2000;
Axelsson, 2000) and is not affected by diet. However, diseases such as cystic fibrosis and some
medications such as pilocarpine cause an increase in calcium levels. Depending on the pH, sali-
vary calcium can be ionized or linked. Ionized calcium is important for establishing equilibrium
between the calcium phosphates of enamel and its adjacent liquid. Non-ionized calcium can be
linked to inorganic ions (inorganic phosphate, bicarbonate, fluoride), to small organic ions (cit-
rate), and to macromolecules (statherin, histidine-rich peptides, and proline-rich proteins). A

Page | 15

1
5
special case of the combination of calcium is its strong link with -amylase, where it acts as a co-
factor necessary for the enzyme function (Tenovuo and Lagerlof 2000; Axelsson, 2000).
Inorganic orthophosphate found in saliva consists of phosphoric acid (H3PO4) and primary
(H2PO4
-
), secondary (HPO4
2-
), and tertiary (PO4
3-
) inorganic phosphate ions. The concentrations
of these ions depend on salivary pH and vary in accordance with the salivary flow. As the flow
increases, the total concentration of inorganic phosphate diminishes (Tenovuo and Lagerlof
2000; Axelsson, 2000). The most important biological function of this ion is to maintain the den-
tal structure.
The presence of fluoride in saliva, even at physiologically low levels, is decisive for the stability
of dental minerals. Its concentration in total saliva is related to its consumption. It is dependent
on the fluoride in the environment, especially in drinking water. Other sources are also im-
portant, such as dentifrices and other products used in caries prevention. The presence of fluoride
ions in the liquid phase reduces mineral loss during a drop in biofilm pH, as these ions diminish
the solubility of dental hydroxyapatite, making it more resistant to demineralization. It has also
been demonstrated fluoride reduces the production of acids in biofilm (Humphrey and William-
son, 2001; Tenovuo and Lagerlof 2000; Axelsson, 2000; Larsen and Bruun, 2001).
2.5 Buffer for the oral cavity
Oral pH is buffered to a small extent by saliva proteins and phosphate. The major influence on
saliva pH however is bicarbonate ion which is a by-product of cell metabolism. Bicarbonate con-
centration increases in saliva as the flow rate rises and is due to the increased metabolic rate.
This, in turn, raises the pH (more alkaline) of saliva.

Page | 16

1
6
Saliva behaves as a buffer system to protect the mouth (Tenovuo and Lagerlof, 1994; Nagler
2004) as follows:
It prevents colonization by potentially pathogenic microorganisms by denying them op-
timization of environmental conditions.
Saliva buffers (neutralizes) and cleans the acids produced by acidogenic microorganisms,
thus, preventing enamel demineralization (Cate, 1998).
It is important to emphasize biofilm thickness, and the number of bacteria present determines the
efficacy of salivary buffers (Humphrey and Williamson, 2004). Negatively loaded residues on
the salivary proteins work as buffers. Sialin, a salivary peptide, plays an important role in in-
creasing the biofilm pH after exposure to fermentable carbohydrates (Tenovuo and Lagerlf,
1994; Cate, 1998). The phosphate buffer is active in unstimulated saliva (Bardow et al., 2008).
The mechanism for the phosphate buffer system is due to the ability of the secondary phosphate
ion, HPO4
2-
, to bind a hydrogen ion and form a primary phosphate ion H2PO4
-
. This acid-base
pair has a pKa value in the range 6.8-7.2, which has a maximum buffering capacity that is rela-
tively close to the salivary pH range; 6-8. Hence the phosphate buffer has the potential to be an
effective buffer in the mouth. However, its effectiveness is limited due to insufficient concentra-
tions of phosphate in the oral cavity.
Urea is another buffer present in total salivary fluid which is a product of amino acid and protein
catabolism that causes a rapid increase in biofilm pH by releasing ammonia and carbon dioxide
when hydrolyzed by bacterial ureases (Edgar, 1992; Jenkins, 1978; Tenovuo and Lagerlf, 1994;
Edgar et al., 2004; Jaffe et al., 1986; Ertugrul et al., 2003).

Page | 17

1
7
Ammonia, a product of urea and amino acid metabolism, is potentially cytotoxic to gingival tis-
sues. It is an important factor in the initiation of gingivitis because it may increase the permeabil-
ity of the sulcular epithelium to other toxic or antigenic substances in addition to the formation of
dental calculus (Macpherson and Dawes, 1991).
2.6 Digestion
Saliva is responsible for the initial digestion of starch, favoring the formation of the food bolus
(Cate, 1998; Constanzo, 2004). This action occurs mainly by the presence of the digestive en-
zyme -amylase (ptyalin) in the composition of the saliva. Its biological function is to divide the
starch into maltose, maltotriose, and dextrins.This enzyme is considered to be a good indicator of
properly functioning salivary glands (Enberg et al., 2001), contributing 40% to 50% of the total
salivary protein produced by the glands. The greater part of this enzyme (80%) is synthesized in
the parotids and the remainder in the submandibular glands. Its action is inactivated in the acid
portions of the gastrointestinal tract and is consequently limited to the mouth (Edgar, 1992;
Humphrey and Williamson, 2001; Tenovuo and Lagerlof, 1994; Douglas 2002; Schenkels et al.,
1995).
2.7 Tissue Repair
A tissue repair function is attributed to saliva since clinically the bleeding time of oral tissues
appears to be shorter than other tissues. When saliva is experimentally mixed with blood, the co-
agulation time can be greatly accelerated (although the resulting clot is less solid than normal).
Experimental studies in mice have shown wound contraction is significantly increased in the
presence of saliva due to the epidermal growth factor it contains which is produced by the sub-
mandibular glands (Cate, 1998).

Page | 18

1
8
Chapter 3: Major Components of the Salivary Pellicle
Some components of the salivary pellicle includes; albumin, amylase, lysosome, lactoferrin,
acidic proline-rich proteins, statherin, mucin-glycoprotein 1 and 2, carbonic anhydrase and secre-
tory immunoglobulin A (S-IgA) etc.
Sugars in their free form are present in total stimulated and unstimulated saliva at a mean con-
centration of 0.5 to 1 mg/100mL (Edgar, 1992; Jenkins, 1978). High concentrations of sugar in
saliva mainly occur after the intake of food and drink (Edgar, 1992; Jenkins, 1978). It is known
that there is a correlation between the glucose concentration in the blood and salivary fluid, par-
ticularly in diabetics, but because this is not always significant, saliva is not used as a means of
monitoring blood sugar (Ben-Aryeh et al., 1988).
The salivary components could be grouped into three (3) different groups based on their func-
tions. These are: Digestive components, Buffering components and Immunoactive/immunologic
components.
Among the immunologic salivary components, there are enzymes (lysozyme, lactoferrin, and
peroxidase), mucin glycoproteins, agglutinins, histatins, proline-rich proteins, statherins, S-IgA
and cystatins (Axelsson, 2000; Schenkels, 1985).






Page | 19

1
9
Table 2: The mean concentration (mg/100ml) of selected constituents of whole human saliva.
Constituent Whole Saliva (mg/100ml)
Resting State Stimulated State
Protein 220 280
IgA 19
IgG 1
IgM Less than 1
Amylase 38
Lysozyme 22 11
Albumin tr tr
Sodium 15 60
Calcium 6 6
Magnesium Less than 1 Less than 1
Phosphate 17 12
Bicarbonate 31 200
* Note: tr =trace amounts
Source: Marsh and Martin, 2009



Page | 20

2
0
3.0 Albumin
Albumin is a major protein found in the body and is unique from other proteins in that it is not
glycosylated. Albumin is water soluble, moderately soluble in concentrated salt solutions and can
be denatured by heat (Meister-Green et al., 2010).
3.1 Digestive Components of the Salivary Pellicle
3.1.1 Amylase
Amylase is an enzyme which initiates enzymatic hydrolysis in the mouth. Amylase is secreted in
the parotid gland and converts starch into sugar. The action of amylase on substances causes the
phenomenon where some food which contains little sugar but a lot of starch tastes sweet when
in the mouth.
Though three types of amylases have been found in nature namely -amylase, -amylase and -
amylase, only -amylase is found in the saliva.
3.2 Buffering Components of the Salivary Pellicle
3.2.1 Carbonic anhydrase (CA)
Description and Functions:
The carbonic anhydrases (or carbonate dehydratases) form a family of enzymes that catalyze the
rapid interconversion of carbon dioxide and water to bicarbonate and protons (or vice versa),
a reversible reaction that occurs rather slowly in the absence of a catalyst (Badger, 1994).
CO2 + H2C HCO3
-
+ H
+


Page | 21

2
1
Carbonic anhydrase I (CAI) is one out of ten CA isoenzymes that have been identified in hu-
mans. The isoform of carbonic anhydrase found in saliva is carbonic anhydrase VI (CA-VI) and
it is coded by the CA6 gene (HGNC, 2012).
Ever since its discovery by Meldrum and Roughton (1933), and Stadie and O'Brien (1933), the
zinc enzyme carbonic anhydrase (CA) has been studied extensively because of its wide occur-
rence in living systems and its role in several physiological processes (Tashian 1989). This en-
zyme catalyzes the reversible hydration of carbon dioxide to bicarbonate with production of a
proton (Meldrum and Roughton 1933; Coleman 1967; Lindskog et at 1984; Silverman and Lind-
skog 1988). It also catalyzes the hydrolysis of esters (Pocker and Stone, 1965; Tashain, et al.,
1963, 1964), hydration of aldehydes (Pocker and Meany, 1965), and is associated with many im-
portant processes such as CO2 transport as HCO3
-
acid-base homeostasis, ion transport, for-
mation of aqueous humour and gastric juice, and syntheses of urea, glucose and fatty acids (Ma-
ren, 1967, 1991; Coulson and Herbert, 1984; Tashian, 1989; Swenson 1991; Henry 1996).
The physiological role of salivary CA VI has been clarified during recent years (Kivela et al,
1999a). Low salivary concentrations of CA VI appear to be associated with increased prevalence
of caries and acid-peptic diseases (Kivela et al, 1999a). It was shown by Kivela and co-workers
(1999b) that salivary CA VI correlates negatively with DMFT- values, especially in individuals
with poor oral hygiene. In 1974, Szabo reported higher CA activity levels in caries-free children
than in children with active caries. Since there is a positive correlation between CA VI concen-
tration and salivary flow rate, and a negative correlation with the DMFT index, recent research
suggests that salivary CA VI plays a role in protecting the teeth from caries (Kivela et al, 1999a,
b).

Page | 22

2
2


Contrary to earlier predictions, CA VI does not seem to be directly involved in the regulation of
actual salivary pH or buffer capacity, and no correlation has been found between salivary CA VI
concentration and mutans streptococci or lactobacilli levels (Kivela et al, 1999b). CA VI has
been reported to bind to the enamel pellicle and retain its enzymatic activity on the tooth surface
(Fig. 4) (Leinonen et al, 1999). In the enamel pellicle, CA VI may catalyze the conversion of sal-
ivary bicarbonate and microbe-delivered hydrogen ions to carbon dioxide and water.
3.3 Immunoactive/Immunologic Components of the Salivary Pellicle
3.3.1 Cystatins
Cystatins are cysteine rich peptides that inhibit bacterial cysteine proteases. Hence, cystatins are
bacteriostatic in the oral cavity. Cystatins also regulate inflammation by inhibiting host proteas-
es and up-regulating cytokines. Von Ebner gland protein is another cysteine protease inhibitor
(Lamont and Jenkinson, 2010)
Fig 5: Suggested model for the function of CA VI on the dental surface.
Source: Saliva and Dental Caries, 2000

Page | 23

2
3
The cystatins are related to acquired film formation and to hydroxyapatite crystal equilibrium.
Due to its proteinase inhibiting properties, it is surmised they act in controlling proteolytic activi-
ty (Edgar, 1992; Humphrey and Williamson, 2001; Tenovuo and Lagerlof, 1994; Amerongen
and Veerman; Blankenvoorde et al., 1996).
3.3.2 Histatins
The histatins, a family of cationic histidine-rich peptides (Amerongen and Veerman, 2002) have
antimicrobial activity against some strains of Streptococcus mutans (Mackay et al., 1984) and
inhibit hemoagglutination of the periopathogen, Porphyromonas gingivallis (Murakami et al.,
1992). They also kill Candida albicans (Lamont and Jenkinson, 2010). They neutralize the lipo-
polysaccharides of the external membranes of Gram-negative bacteria and are potent inhibitors
of Candida albicans growth and development (Xu et al., 1991). Histatins have both fungicidal
and bactericidal effects in the oral cavity.
The bactericidal and fungicidal effects occur through the union of positively loaded histatins
with the biological membranes resulting in the destruction of their architecture and altering their
permeability. Other functions attributed to these peptides are: participation in acquired film for-
mation and inhibition of histamine release by the mastocytes, suggesting a role in oral inflamma-
tion (Schenkels and Veerman, 1995).
At least 12 histatins are present in saliva, resulting from truncations or proteolysis of the genet-
ically distinct histatins 1 and 3. Histatin-5 (the N-terminal 24 amino acids of histatin-3) is a ma-
jor salivary histatin and is very effective in killing yeast. Histatins bind to a Candida membrane
receptor, and then the peptide is taken up by the cells. This result in arrest of the cell cycle and

Page | 24

2
4
the cells lose ATP by efflux. Histatins can also regulate hydroxyapatite crystal growth, inhibit
bacterial cysteine proteinases and prevent bacterial coaggregation (Lamont and Jenkinson, 2010).
3.3.3 Lactoferrin
Description:
Lactoferrin (formerly known as lactotransferrin) is a glycoprotein, and a member of a transferrin
family, thus belonging to those proteins capable of binding and transferring iron (Fe
3+
) ions
(Metz-Boutique et al., 1984). Lactoferrin is a glycoprotein with a molecular weight of about 80
kDa, which shows high affinity for iron. The molecular structure and amino acid sequence of
human lactoferrin were discovered in 1984. Lactoferrin was then classified as a member of the
transferrin family, due to its 60% sequence identity with serum transferrin (Metz-Boutique et al.,
1984).
Three different isoforms of lactoferrin have been isolated. Lactoferrin- is the iron binding form,
but has no ribonuclease activity. On the other hand lactoferrin- and lactoferrin- demonstrate
ribonuclease activity but they are not able to bind iron (Furmanski et al., 1989).
There are three forms of lactoferrin according to its iron saturation: apolactoferrin (iron free),
monoferric form (one ferric ion), and hololactoferrin (binds two Fe3+ ions). The tertiary struc-
ture in hololactoferrin and apolactoferrin is different (Jameson et al., 1998).
Immunoactivity
Lactoferrin is considered to be a part of the innate immune system. At the same time, lactoferrin
also takes part in specific immune reactions, but in an indirect way (Legrand et al., 2005). Due to
its strategic position on the mucosal surface lactoferrin represents one of the first defense sys-
tems against microbial agents invading the organism mostly via mucosal tissues. Lactoferrin af-

Page | 25

2
5
fects the growth and proliferation of a variety of infectious agents including both Gram-positive
and negative bacteria, viruses, protozoa, or fungi (Kirkpatrick et al., 1971).
Lactoferrin links to free iron in the saliva causing bactericidal or bacteriostatic effects on various
microorganisms requiring iron for their survival such as the Streptococcus mutans group. Lac-
toferrin also provides fungicidal, antiviral, anti-inflammatory, and immunomodulatory functions
(Edgar, 1992; Humphrey and Williamson, 2001; Tenovuo and Lagerlof, 1994; Amerongen and
Veerman, 2002; Nikawa et al., 1993).
Its ability to bind free iron, which is one of the elements essential for the growth of bacteria, is
responsible for the bacteriostatic effect of lactoferrin (Arnold et al., 1980). A lack of iron inhibits
the growth of iron-dependent bacteria such as E. coli (Brock, 1980). In contrast, lactoferrin may
serve as iron donor and in this manner support the growth of some bacteria with lower iron de-
mands such as Lactobacillus sp. or Bifidobacterium sp., but lacoferrin is generally considered as
beneficial (Petschow et al., 1999; Sherman et al., 2004).
Lactoferrins capability of binding iron is two times higher than that of transferrin, which can
serve in some cases as donor of Fe
3+
ions for lactoferrin. Two ferric ions can be bound by one
lactoferrin molecule. One carbonate ion is always bound by lactoferrin concurrently with each
ferric ion (Aisen and Liebman, 1972; Metz-Boutique et al., 1984; Baker, 1994). Although this
bond is very strong and can resist pH values of as low as 4, its saturation does not exceed 10% in
total (Mazurier and Spik, 1980).
Four amino acid residues are most important for iron binding (histidine, twice tyrosine, and as-
partic acid); while an arginine chain is responsible for binding the carbonate ion (Baker, 1994;
Ward et al., 1996).

Page | 26

2
6
The ability to keep iron bound even at low pH is important, especially at sites of infection and
inflammation where, due to the metabolic activity of bacteria, the pH may fall under 4.5. In such
a situation lactoferrin also binds iron released from transferrin, which prevents its further usage
for bacterial proliferation (Valenti and Antonini, 2005).
The bactericidal activity of lactoferrin is not iron-dependent and may be mediated through more
than one pathway. Receptors for the N-terminal region of lactoferrin have been discovered on the
surface of some microorganisms. The binding of lactoferrin to these receptors induces cell-death
in Gram-negative bacteria due to a disruption in the cell wall. The subsequent release of lipopol-
ysacharide leads to impaired permeability and a higher sensitivity to lysozyme and other an-
timicrobial agents (Arnold et al., 1977; Yamauchi et al., 1993; Leitch and Willcox, 1998). Lipo-
polysacharide can be disposed of even without the direct contact of lactoferrin with the cell sur-
face (Rossi et al., 2002). Bactericidal activity affecting Gram-positive bacteria is mediated by
electrostatic interactions between the negatively charged lipid layer and the positively charged
lactoferrin surface that cause changes in the permeability of the membrane (Valenti and Anto-
nini, 2005).
It has been discovered that lactoferricin, a cationic peptide generated by the pepsin digestion of
lactoferrin, has more potent bactericidal activity than the native protein. There are two forms
known at present; lactoferricin H (derived from human lactoferrin) and lactoferricin B (of bovine
origin) (Bellamy et al., 1992).
As a result of the fusion of secondary granules with phagosomes, lactoferrin becomes an iron
provider for the catalysis of free radical production and thereby increases the intracellular bacte-
ricidal activity of neutrophils (Sanchez et al., 1992). In vitro lactoferrin is able to prevent Pseu-

Page | 27

2
7
domonas aeruginosa biofilm formation. The lack of iron in the environment forces bacteria to
move. Therefore, they cannot adhere to surfaces (Singh et al., 2002).
Lactoferrin may contribute to defense against the invasion of facultative intracellular bacteria
into cells by binding both target cell membrane glycoaminoglycans and bacterial invasins, which
prevents pathogen adhesion to target cells. This ability was first reported against enteroinvasive
E. coli HB 101 and later also against Yersinia enterocolica, Yersinia pseudotuberculosis, Listeria
monocytogenes, Streptococcus pyogenes, and Staphylococcus aureus (Valenti and Antonini,
2005).
The proteolytic activity of lactoferrin is considered to inhibit the growth of some bacteria such as
Shigella flexneri or enteropathogenic E.coli through degrading proteins necessary for coloniza-
tion. However, this can be disabled by serine protease inhibitors (Orsi, 2004; Ward et al., 2005).
Lactoferrin is capable of binding certain DNA and RNA viruses (Yi et al., 1997). Nevertheless,
its main contribution to antiviral defense consists in its binding to cell membrane glycosamino-
glycans. In this manner lactoferrin prevents viruses from entering cells and infection is stopped
at an early stage (Ward et al., 2005). Such a mechanism has been demonstrated as being effec-
tive against the Herpes simplex virus (Fujihara and Hayashi, 1995; Marchetti et al., 1996), cyto-
megaloviruses (Andersen et al., 2001), and the human immunodeficiency virus (Harmsen et al.,
1995), respectively.
Lactoferrin acts against parasites in various ways. For example, the infectivity of Toxoplasma
gondii and Eimeria stiedai sporozoites is reduced after their incubation with lactoferricin B. It is
thought that lactoferricin breaches parasitic membrane integrity causing subsequent changes in
interactions between the host and the parasite (Omata et al., 2001). The competition for iron be-

Page | 28

2
8
tween the parasite and lactoferrin is the basis of its antiparasitic activity against Pneumocystis
carinii (Cirioni et al., 2000). In contrast, some parasites such as Tritrichomonas foetus are able to
use lactoferrin as a donor of ferric ions (Tachezy et al., 1996)
Besides iron lactoferrin is capable of binding a large amount of other compounds and substances
such as lipopolysacharides, heparin, glycosaminoglycans, DNA, or other metal ions like Al
3+
,
Ga
3+
, Mn
3+
, Co
3+
, Cu
2+,
Zn
2+
etc. However, its affinity for these other ions is much lower. Apart
from CO3
2
, lactoferrin can bind a variety of other anions like oxalates, carboxylates, and others.
In this way it is possible for lactoferrin to affect the metabolism and distribution of various sub-
stances (Baker, 1994). Thanks to its antimicrobial activity and capability of binding components
of bacterial cell walls or their receptors, lactoferrin may prevent the development of inflamma-
tion and subsequent tissue damage caused by the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines and re-
active oxygen species (Legrand et al., 2005).
3.3.4 Lysozyme
Description and Synthesis:
Lysozyme is a single chain polypeptide of 129 amino acids cross-linked with four disulfide
bridges (Jolles, 1969) and is a basic protein found in most secretions, including saliva, where it is
present in high concentrations. Salivary lysozyme originates from both the salivary gland secre-
tions and from gingival crevicular fluid (Lamont and Jenkinson, 2010).
Immunoactivity
The activity of lysozyme is a function of both pH and ionic strength. The enzyme is active over a
broad pH range (6.09.0). At pH 6.2, maximal activity is observed over a wider range of ionic
strengths (0.020.100 M) than at pH 9.2 (0.010.06 M) (Davies et al., 1969)

Page | 29

2
9
The natural substrate for lysozyme is the peptidoglycan layer of bacterial cell walls (Holtje,
1996). Hence, lysozyme hydrolyzes/digests the cell walls of Gram-positive bacteria by breaking
the (1-4) bond between N-acetylmuramic acid and N-acetylglucosamine in peptidoglycan (Fig-
ure 6) and between N-acetyl-D-glucosamine residues in chitodextrin (Rupley, 1964; Holler,
1975). Gram-positive cells are quite susceptible to this hydrolysis as their cell walls have a high
proportion of peptidoglycan. Gram negative bacteria are less susceptible due to the presence of
an outer membrane and a lower proportion of peptidoglycan. (Sigma, 2012). Not surprisingly,
many successful oral colonizers are relatively resistant to killing by lysozyme.
Lysozyme being strongly cationic can activate the bacterial autolisines which are able to de-
stroy bacterial cell wall components. Other antibacterial mechanisms have been proposed for this
enzyme, such as inhibition of bacterial adherence by swallowing or expectoration (Edgar, 1992;
Humphrey and Williamson, 2001; Tenovuo and Lagerlof, 1994; Schenkels et al., 1995; Amer-
ongen and Veerman, 2002; Lamont and Jenkinson, 2010). In addition, lysozyme contains small
amphipathic sequences in the C-terminal region that are capable of killing bacteria (Lamont and
Jenkinson, 2010).

Page | 30

3
0

3.3.5 Peroxidase
Peroxidase in saliva is derived from the salivary glands and polymorphonuclear neutrophils
(PMNs). Peroxidase or sialoperoxidase offers antimicrobial activity because it serves as a cata-
lyst for the oxidation of the salivary thiocyanate ion (SCN) by hydrogen peroxide into hypothi-
ocyanate (OSCN

), a potent antibacterial substance which is produced by the aerobic metabolism

of oral bacteria. At acid pH, OSCN

becomes protonated (and uncharged) and readily passes

through bacterial membranes. Hypothiocyanite oxidizes SH groups in bacterial enzymes and in-
hibits bacterial metabolism (Humphrey and Williamson, 2001; Tenovuo and Lagerlof, 1994).
As a result of its consumption, proteins and cells are protected from the toxic and oxidant effects
of hydrogen peroxide. Reduction of hydrogen peroxide to water by peroxidase also prevents oxi-
dative damage to the host soft tissues (Edgar, 1992; Humphrey and Williamson, 2001; Tenovuo
and Lagerlof, 1994; Amerongen and Veerman).
Fig 6: Action of lysozyme on Gram-positive bacterial peptidoglycan
Source: Lamont and Jenkinson, 2008.

Page | 31

3
1
3.3.6 Proline-rich Proteins (PRPs)
These include acidic proline-rich proteins and proline-rich glycoproteins. Saliva contains acidic
and basic proline-rich proteins (PRPs) which attach to oral streptococci. Basic PRPs inhibit HIV
infectivity by binding to the gp120 regions of the virus (Lamont and Jenkinson, 2010).
The proline-rich proteins and statherins inhibit the spontaneous precipitation of calcium phos-
phate salts and the growth of hydroxyapatite crystals on the tooth surface, preventing the for-
mation of salivary and dental calculus. They favor oral structure lubrication, and it is probable
both are important in the formation of acquired film. Another function proposed for the proline-
rich proteins is the capacity to selectively mediate bacterial adhesion to tooth surfaces (Edgar,
1992; Humphrey and Williamson, 2001; Tenovuo and Lagerlof, 1994; Amerongen and Veer-
man).
3.3.7 Mucin-glycoprotein 1 and 2 (MG 1 & 2)
Description and Synthesis:
Mucins are present at all surfaces within the human body that are exposed to the environment.
Mucins are composed of an amino acid chain backbone (polypeptide) with chains of sugar resi-
dues attached to the amino acids serine, threonine, or asparagine. Mucins are the basis of salivary
function and are site specific.
Salivary mucins are extremely large proteins carrying chains of sugar residues linked together. In
saliva there are two main types of mucin, designated mucin glycoprotein 1 (MG1) and the small-
er mucin glycoprotein 2 (MG2). MG1 is encoded by the MUC5B gene and MG2 is encoded by
the MUC7 gene. Mucins are produced by all salivary glands except (or in very low amounts) by
the parotid gland (Lamont and Jenkinson, 2010).

Page | 32

3
2
Immunoactivity
Mucins form complexes that are key to their functional properties. Charged carboxyl or amino
groups present on amino acids can form ionic cross links with oppositely charged groups on ad-
jacent polypeptide chains. Cysteine residues present in one chain can form disulfide bonds with
cysteine residues in another chain. Both of these inter-chain interactions tend to align mucin
chains with each other (Figure 5). Sialic acid residues, which are highly negatively charged, can
then interact with sialic acid residues on aligned chains through bridging with Ca2+ ions.

The sialic acid residues are very important to mucin function, as they are to other systems in the
human body. The negatively charged residues act to keep the mucin chains apart, allowing water
molecules to become trapped between them. Mucin function depends upon this trapping of water
molecules, thus determining the degree of hydration of the mucin gel. Mucin has high viscosity
when it is hydrated and gel-like, and MG1 is the main gel-forming mucin in saliva (Figure 6).
Fig 7: Alignment of mucin chains
Source: Lamont and Jenkinson, 2008.

Page | 33

3
3

The viscosity and elastic properties of saliva are attributed to the gel-forming mucins. These
have multiple cysteine-rich domains that form disulfide bonds and thus generate multimeric
complexes. The non-gel forming mucins provide a relatively close coating of epithelial cells,
protecting the cell membrane from physical or biological damage. Some of them are membrane
tethered (Figure 7). They lack the cysteine rich domains of the gel forming mucins (Lamont and
Jenkinson, 2010).
Since bacteria usually have a net negative surface charge, they tend not to bind directly to nega-
tively charged mucins. Instead, they may interact through bridging reactions involving divalent
cations such as Ca
2+
ions (see Figure 7). However, many bacteria express cell surface proteins
(lectins) that specifically recognize oligosaccharides present on the salivary mucins. In this man-
ner salivary mucins are bound by multiple bacteria and agglutination results. MG2 is thought to
be more important than MG1 for agglutinating bacteria in saliva. Agglutination of some oral
streptococci is lost after removal of the terminal sialic acid of the oligosaccharide side chains,
indicating that the bacterial lectin has sialic acid specificity (Lamont and Jenkinson, 2010). Sali-
vary agglutinin, a highly glycosylated protein frequently associated with other salivary proteins
Fig 8: Gel forming and membrane bound mucins in the oral cavity
Source: Lamont and Jenkinson, 2008.

Page | 34

3
4
and with secretory IgA, is one of the main salivary components responsible for bacteria aggluti-
nation (Amerongen and Veerman, 2002).

3.3.8 Secretory Immunoglobulin A (SIgA)
Description:
The major immunoglobulin in the salivary secretions is immunoglobulin A (IgA). This molecule
is secreted as a complex with a linking chain by cells that are found close to the parotid gland.
The secreted form of IgA is called secretory IgA (or S-IgA). It is found at all mucosal sites, such
as the gastrointestinal tract, respiratory tract and urogenital tract, and it is also present in tears
and breast milk (in addition to saliva). There are two isoforms, or subclasses, of IgA designated
IgA1 and IgA2 and saliva contains approximately equal proportions of each.
Fig 9: Depiction of mechanisms of bacterial agglutination by salivary mucins
Source: Lamont and Jenkinson, 2008.

Page | 35

3
5

Secretory immunoglobulin A (IgA) is the largest immunologic component of saliva. It can neu-
tralize viruses, bacterial, and enzyme toxins. It serves as an antibody for bacterial antigens and is
able to aggregate bacteria, inhibiting their adherence to oral tissues (Humphrey and Williamson,
2001: Axelsson, 2000; Cate, 1998; Schenkels et al., 1985). Other immunologic components,
such as IgG and IgM, occur in less quantity and probably originate from gingival fluid (Humph-
rey and Williamson, 2001; Edgar, 1992). SIgA consists of at least two IgA monomers linked to a
J chain and a secretory component. The J chain and secretory component are disulfide linked to
the Fc region of the IgA molecule. Each IgA monomers consist of two a-heavy chains and two
light chains linked covalently by disulfide bonds.
The primary function of S-IgA is immune exclusion. S-IgA is glycosylated and this anchors S-
IgA to the mucus lining of the epithelial surface and thus inhibits attachment and tissue penetra-
tion by viruses, bacteria, and their released antigens such as LPS, toxins and environmental anti-
Fig 10: Schematic representation of SIgA. The wavy line represents the secretory component.
Source: Marcotte and Lavoie, 1998.

Page | 36

3
6
gens. IgA antibodies do not activate complement, thus minimizing disruption of the epithelial
barrier layer. Free in saliva, polymeric IgA effectively aggregates bacteria.
SIgA is one of the principal factors preventing bacterial translocation, which can result in sepsis
and death of the host. The classic view is that SIgA exerts its effect by aggregating bacteria,
thereby mediating clearance of those bacteria from the gut (Williams and Gibbons, 1972) and
preventing invasion of the body by the bacteria (Brandtzaeg, 1998; Brandtzaeg et al., 1985).
This model of SIgA activity, termed immune exclusion, was originally based on in vitro experi-
ments in which aggregation by SIgA was shown to decrease the ability of bacteria to adhere to
cultured epithelial cells (Williams and Gibbons, 1972). As much as 2.5 g/day of SIgA is secreted
into the lumen of the digestive tract, making it the most heavily produced protein in the body by
weight (Conley and Delacroix, 1987) and suggesting its importance in maintaining normal host-
microbial interactions (Everett et al., 2004). It is thought that the primary function of secretory
IgA (SIgA) is, in conjunction with the mucus lining of the gut, to prevent translocation of bacte-
ria across the epithelial barrier (Everett et al., 2004).
Synthesis:
Salivary IgA is produced by plasma cells that are located adjacent to the duct and acini of sali-
vary glands (Korsrud and Brandtzaeg, 1980). IgA secreting plasma cells predominate in the ma-
jor and minor salivary glands over plasma cells producing other Ig isotypes (Michalek and Chil-
ders, 1990). Polymeric IgA containing J chain, secreted by plasma cells, is specifically recog-
nized by the PIgR located on the basolateral surface of the ductal and acinar cells (Tomasi,
1989). The polymeric IgA-PIgR complex is internalized into endocytic vesicles and transported
to the apical surface of the epithelial cells. After fusion of the vesicles with the cell membrane,

Page | 37

3
7
the PIgR is proteolytically cleaved, which releases a portion of PIgR, called SC, and polymeric
IgA into the secretions as SIgA (Childers et al., 1989; Tomasi, 1989). During the external trans-
location, disulfide bonds covalently link SC with polymeric IgA, which in turn stabilizes the
IgA-SC complex (Bradtzaeg, 1995).


Immunoactivity
Inhibition of bacterial adherence: The inhibition of bacterial adherence by SIgA is consid-
ered one of the most important defense mechanisms against mucosal bacterial invasion. SIgA
interferes with bacterial adherence to host surfaces by preventing both nonspecific and stere-
ochemical interactions. The binding of SIgA to adhesins can reduce the negative surface
charge and the hydrophobicity of bacteria, thus limiting the potential for ionic and hydropho-
bic interactions between bacteria and host receptors (Marcotte and Lavoie, 1998). Free in sa-
liva, polymeric IgA effectively aggregates bacteria (Lamont and Jenkinson, 2010).
Fig 11: Steps in the production and secretion of IgA at the mucosal surface

Page | 38

3
8
Toxin Neutralization: SIgA can neutralize toxins by blocking their binding to cell receptors
(Marcotte and Lavoie, 1998). Glycans on S-IgA are also able to non-specifically trap bacte-
ria. S-IgA interacts with mucins and so-called scavenger proteins such as gp340 present in
saliva to generate heterotypic complexes that trap bacteria and stimulate macrophage migra-
tion (Lamont and Jenkinson, 2010).
Viral Immunity: SIgA plays an important role in viral immunity because of its presence at
the site of initial contact between virions and host cells. A protective effect of SIgA against
respiratory and enteric viral infections has been demonstrated (Marcotte and Lavoie, 1998).
Immune exclusion: Immune exclusion entails the prevention of bacterial movement across
the mucosal barrier by a combination of a thick, flowing mucus barrier and the secretory im-
mune system (Everett et al., 2004). One of the major functions of SIgA is to perform immune
exclusion, which consists of limiting the penetration of antigenic materials through the mu-
cosal epithelium. This involves the binding of SIgA antibodies with antigens, which facili-
tates their removal from mucosal surfaces (Marcotte and Lavoie, 1998).
Immune exclusion is not considered to be promicrobial by any means. As stated by
Brandtzaeg in 1998, The main purpose of the secretory antibody system is, in cooperation
with innate mucosal defense mechanisms (Goldblum et al., 1996), to inhibit colonization and
invasion of pathogens (Brandtzaeg, 1998). Thus, the relationship between SIgA and patho-
genic bacteria is thought to be antagonistic.
But what about the relationship between SIgA and the normal flora? It is known that SIgA,
which is elicited in response to normal enteric bacteria (Shroff and Cebra, 1995; Shroff et al.,
1995), also binds to the normal flora (Shroff and Cebra, 1995; Shroff et al., 1995; Orndoff et
al.,, 2004). Thus, presumably, SIgA exercises a degree of immune exclusion toward the nor-

Page | 39

3
9
mal flora, as well as toward pathogenic bacteria. However, given the known benefits of the
normal flora (MacDonald and Pettersson, 2000; Harp et al., 1992), this conclusion is perhaps
counterintuitive and, at the very least, gives pause for thought.
The currently accepted paradigm is that SIgA-mediated aggregation of bacteria decreases
adherence of those bacteria to epithelial surfaces (Williams and Gibbons, 1972).This theo-
ry stems from work by Williams and Gibbons (1972), who demonstrated that bacteria agglu-
tinated by SIgA adhere to epithelial surfaces in vitro less well than do unagglutinated bacte-
ria. Binding of Streptococcus sanguis (S. sanguis), S. mitis and two strains of S. salivarius to
cultured human epithelial cells was inhibited by 68%, 63%, 68% and 76%, respectively, by
the presence of SIgA at agglutinating concentrations. Thus, the study by Williams and Gib-
bons found a relatively simple and negative relationship between aggregation and adhesion
using a particular set of conditions (Williams and Gibbons, 1972).
Effects of SIgA Deficiency
In past studies, Ig-deficient patients have been used as potential models for elucidating the role
of host immunity in the control of diseases. Selective IgA deficiency is the most common prima-
ry immunodeficiency and can occur at a frequency within a population varying from 1:300 to
1:3,000 depending on the screened population (Liblau and Bach, 1992). Patients with antibody
deficiencies show an increased susceptibility to microbial infections, more particularly in the in-
testinal and upper respiratory tracts (Amman and Hong, 1980; De Laat et al., 1991). Ig-deficient
patients, especially those deficient in IgA, represent a useful model for studying the role of sali-
vary IgA in oral health and diseases. If salivary IgA plays a major role in the maintenance of the
homeostasis of the oral microbiota, Ig-deficient individuals should show an increased suscepti-
bility to caries and periodontal diseases. It should be noted that Salivary IgA is part of a complex

Page | 40

4
0
and interdependent immune defense system and hence its full effects and deficiencies are not ful-
ly researched or documented.
Numerous studies have focused on the development of a vaccine that could induce salivary IgA
antibodies and be effective in protecting against caries.
3.3.9 Statherin
Statherin is a highly stable salivary protein of low molecular mass (5,380). A study of DNA from
human-hamster somatic cell hybrids indicated that statherin is coded by a single-copy gene lo-
cated in region 4q11-q13. Dentinogenesis imperfecta and perhaps juvenile periodontitis are cod-
ed in the same region.
Statherin play an important role in the maintenance of oral health since, like the proline-rich pro-
teins, it binds calcium and inhibits crystal growth. Statherin also inhibits spontaneous precipita-
tion of calcium phosphate salts. Thus, statherin and PRPs may prevent build-up of harmful de-
posits in the salivary glands and on the tooth surfaces (Humphrey and Williamson, 2001).
3.4 Summary of Immunoactive Components of the Saliva

Immunoactive Component Function/Activity
Cystatin Bacteriostatic
Histatin Bactericidal and fungicidal
Lactoferrin Iron sequestration
Lysozyme Bactericidal (More effective on gram positive
bacteria due to the peptidoglycan in their cell
Table 3: Immunoactive Components in Saliva and their functions

Page | 41

4
1
walls)
Peroxidase Bactericidal
Proline-Rich Proteins Bacteriostatic and bactericidal.
Mucin-glycoprotein 1 and 2 Bactericidal, physical removal of microorgan-
isms
Secretory Immunoglobulin A Bacteriostatic, bactericidal, anti-viral
Statherin Bacteriostatic
Source: Anonymous


Page | 42

4
2
Chapter 4: Inactivation of salivary defenses
The oral microbiota has evolved to grow and survive in the human mouth despite the salivary
defenses, and these organisms have devised means to resist IgA and salivary defenses. For ex-
ample, some Streptococcus, Haemophilus and Neisseria species produce proteases that specifi-
cally cleave S-IgA1, disrupting functions such as complexing and clumping. S-IgA1 fragments
may also promote bacterial adherence and accumulation. IgA2 has a deletion in the hinge region
that renders it resistant to these proteases. Other bacteria produce glycan hydrolysases that cleave
sugar chains from mucins. This causes changes in mucin properties making them much less effi-
cient, both in binding bacteria and in lubrication. This adaptation could be a factor that allows
Streptococcus mutans to be effective as a cariogenic agent (Lamont and Jenkinson, 2010).
Also, some bacteria are able to adapt to lactoferrin activities by releasing siderophores (iron che-
lating compounds of bacterial origin) that compete with lactoferrin for Fe
3+
ions (Crosa, 1989;
Ratledge and Dover, 2000). Some other types of bacteria, including Neisseriaceae family, adapt
to new conditions by expressing specific receptors capable of binding lactoferrin, and to cause
changes in the tertiary structure of the lactoferrin molecule leading to iron dissociation (Schryv-
ers et al., 1998; Ekins et al., 2004). Some parasites such as Tritrichomonas foetus are able to use
lactoferrin as a donor of ferric ions (Tachezy et al., 1996).
4.1 Salivary Flow and Factors Affecting It
Salivary flow varies in the stimulated (eg, chewing) and unstimulated states (Humphrey and Wil-
liamson, 2001). Stimulated flow contributes up to 90% of average daily saliva production, at a
rate of between 0.2 and 7mL/min. In the stimulated state, the parotid glands contribute more than
50% of total salivary flow. In contrast, normal flow in the unstimulated state is more than 0.1
mL/min, with the submandibular glands contributing approximately 65% of total flow; the pa-

Page | 43

4
3
rotid glands, 20%; and the sublingual glands, 7%8%. Certain drugs and therapies such as radia-
tion therapy have been known to affect salivary flow. Emotional states such as anxiety, stress
and fear also affect salivary flow as evidenced by the dry mouth phenomenon (Humphrey and
Williamson, 2001).
4.2 Effects of Reduced Salivary Flow
Xerostomia refers to dryness of the mouth caused by hyposalivation. Xerostomia disrupts the
normal homeostasis of the oral cavity, leading to a range of oral and dental disorders. It also
causes difficulty in speech, taste and eating (Brosky, 2007).
Xerostomia can have a significant impact on patients health, well-being, and overall quality of
life. Studies have documented speech difficulties (Rhodus et al., 1995), changes in taste sensa-
tion (Rose-Ped etal., 2002), swallowing difficulties and decreased dietary intake.
The saliva is also reputed to have some anti-caryogenic properties. Probably the most important
anti-caryogenic activity of saliva is the flushing and neutralizing effects, commonly referred to as
"salivary clearance" or "oral clearance capacity" (Lagerlof and Oliveby, 1994). Hence, xerosto-
mia patients are expected to be more susceptible to dental caries infections (Brown et al, 1978;
Scully, 1986: Heintze et al., 1983) and indeed subjects with impaired saliva flow rate often show
high caries incidence (Papas et al., 1993; Spak et al., 1994).
Reduced salivary flow rate and the concomitant reduction of oral defense systems may also
cause mucosal inflammations (Daniels et al., 1975; Van der Reijden et ah, 1996).
Xerostomia is usually treated using topical therapies with lubricants such as mucin sprays, loz-
enges, humidifiers, gels, mouthwash and toothpaste; coating agents such as Gelchair and Magic

Page | 44

4
4
Mouthwash; and finally saliva stimulants such as pastilles and sugar free gums and candies
(Brosky, 2007).
It must be emphasized, however, that no linear relationship exists among salivary secretion rate,
caries activity, and DMFS/DMFT values (Birkhed and Heintze, 1989; Russell et al, 1990). Only
weak or no association between saliva secretion rates and caries incidence has been shown
(Mandel, 1987, 1989; Russell et al, 1991). Major and minor salivary gland secretion rates have
also been assessed and correlated to the sensation and complaints of dry mouth (xerostomia), ob-
jectively reduced saliva secretion (hyposalivation), as well as to various oral health measures,
and yet there is an unanswered question: How much saliva is enough? (Fox et al, 1987; Ship et
al, 1991).


Page | 45

4
5
4.3 Saliva and Dental Caries Formation
Dental caries, also known as tooth decay or a cavity, is an infection, usually bacterial in origin
that causes demineralization of the hard tissues (enamel, dentin and cementum) and destruction
of the organic matter of the tooth, usually by production of acid by hydrolysis of the food debris
accumulated on the tooth surface.

Caries is a unique multifactorial infectious disease. It is generally accepted, however, that saliva
secretion and salivary components secreted in saliva are important for dental health. The final
result, "caries to be or not to be", is a complex phenomenon involving internal defense factors,
such as saliva, tooth surface morphology, general health, and nutritional and hormonal status,
and a number of external factors-for example, diet, the microbial flora colonizing the teeth, oral
hygiene, and fluoride availability (Lenander-Lumikar and Loimaranta, 2000).
Fig 8: Destruction of a tooth by cervical decay from dental caries (Root decay).
Source: Wikipedia, 2012.

Page | 46

4
6


The notion that dental caries in animals is an infectious, transmissible disease was first demon-
strated by Keyes (1960). Since then, a group of phenotypically similar bacteria, collectively
known as mutans streptococci, has been implicated as the principal bacterial component respon-
sible for the initiation and the development of dental caries (Loesche, 1986).
The tooth surface is unique among all body surfaces in two ways. First, it is a non-shedding hard
surface, and, second, this surface is introduced into the human mouth during the first years of
life. The earliest point at which the cariogenic mutans streptococci may become established is
when the first teeth erupt. Solid surfaces are required for both streptococcal colonization and
multiplication (Loesche, 1986). Once mutans streptococci become established, they are consid-
ered difficult to eliminate, and the caries process is made possible (Li and Caufield, 1995).
Fig 8: Factors affecting dental caries
Source: Saliva and Dental Caries, 2000

Page | 47

4
7
The current concepts of dental caries focus on the fermentation of carbohydrates by cariogenic-
bacteria producing organic acids. Plaque bacteria produce a variety of end-products that may dif-
fer depending on the diet. When fermentable carbohydrates are present, the main organic acids
produced are lactic, formic, and acetic acids (Geddes, 1975, 1981). These acids coincide with a
pH drop in plaque, resulting in demineralization of the tooth (Loesche, 1986; Nyvad and Fejer-
skov, 1996) and creating an environment which is advantageous for further growth of Strepto-
coccus mutans (Bradshaw et al., 1989; Dashper and Reynolds, 2000).
Probably the most important caries-preventive functions of saliva are the flushing and neutraliz-
ing effects, commonly referred to as "salivary clearance" or "oral clearance capacity" (Lagerlof
and Oliveby, 1994). In general, the higher the flow rate, the faster the clearance (Miura et al.,
1991) and the higher the buffer capacity (Birkhed and Heintze, 1989). Reduced salivary flow rate
and the concomitant reduction of oral defense systems may cause severe caries and mucosal in-
flammations (Daniels et al., 1975; Van der Reijden et ah, 1996). In conclusion, dental caries is
probably the most common consequence of hyposalivation (Brown et al, 1978; Scully, 1986).

Page | 48

4
8
References
Aisen P. and Liebman A. (1972). Lactoferrin and Transferrin: A Comparative Study. Biochimica
et Biophysica Acta, 257: 314323.
Amerongen A.V. and Veerman E. C. (2002). Saliva: The Defender of The Oral Cavity: Oral Dis.
8: 12-22.
Amman, A. J. and R. Hong (1980). Selective IgA Deficiency: Presentation of 30 Cases And A
Review Of The Literature. Medicine 50: 223236.
Andersen J.H., Osbakk S.A., Vorland L.H., Traavik T., Gutteberg T.J. (2001): Lactoferrin And
Cyclic Lactoferricin Inhibit The Entry Of Human Fibroblasts. Antiviral Research, 51: 141149.
Arnold R.R., Brewer M., Gauthier J.J. (1980): Bactericidal Activity Of Human Lactoferrin: Sen-
sitivity of A Variety Of Microorganisms. Infection And Immunity, 28: 893898.
Arnold R.R., Cole M.F., McGhee J.R. (1977). A Bactericidal Effect For Human Lactoferrin. Sci-
ence, 197: 263265.
Axelsson P. (2000). Diagnosis and Risk Prediction of Dental Caries. Illinois: Quintessence
Books.
Badger M.R. and Price G.D. (1994). "The Role Of Carbonic Anhydrase In Photosynthsis". Annu.
Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Bio. 45: 369392.
Baker E.N. (1994). Structure And Reactivity Of Transferrins. Advances In Inorganic Chemistry,
41: 389463.

Page | 49

4
9
Ben-Aryeh H., Cohen M., Kanter Y., Szargel R., Laufer D. (1988). Salivary Composition In Di-
abetic Patients. J Diabet Complications, 2: 96-99.
Berkovitz B.K.B., Holland G.R., Moxham B.J. (2002). Oral Anatomy, Histology And Embryolo-
gy. 3rd Ed. New York.
Birkhed D. and Heintze U. (1989). Salivary Secretion Rate, Buffer Capacity and pH. Human Sa-
liva: Clinical Chemistry And Microbiology.
Blankenvoorde M.F., Henskens Y.M., Vant Hof W., Veerman E.C., Nieuw Amerongen A.V.
(1996). Inhibition Of The Growth And Cysteine Proteinase Activity Of Porphyromonas Gingi-
valis By Human Salivary Cystatin S And Chicken Cystatin. Biol Chem. 377: 847-850.
Brandtzaeg P., Valnes K., Scott H., Rognum T.O., Bjerke K., Baklien K. (1985). The Human
Gastrointestinal Secretory Immune System in Health And Disease. Scand J Gastroenterol Suppl.
114: 1738.
Brandtzaeg P. (1998). Development And Basic Mechanisms Of Human Gut Immunity. Nutr Rev.
56:S518.
Brandtzaeg, P. (1995). Molecular And Cellular Aspects Of The Secretory Immunoglobulin Sys-
tem. Acta Pathol. Microbiol. Immunol. Scand. 103:119.
Brock J.H. (1980): Lactoferrin In Human Milk: Its Role In Iron Absorption And Protection
Against Enteric Infection In The Newborn Infant. Archives Of Disease In Childhood. 55:417
421.

Page | 50

5
0
Brown L.R., Dreizen S., Daly T.E., Drane J.B., Handler S., Riggan L.J., et al. (1978). Interrela-
tions of Oral Microorganisms, Immunoglobulins, And Dental Caries Following Radiotherapy. /
Dent Res 57:882-893.
Cassolato S. F. and Turnbull R. S. (2003). Xerostomia: clinical aspects and treatment. Gerodon-
tology. 20:6477.
Childers N. K., M. G. Bruce, and J. R. McGhee. (1989). Molecular Mechanisms Of Immuno-
globulin A Defense. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 43:503536.
Cirioni O., Giacometti A., Barchiesi F., Scalise G. (2000): Inhibition Of Growth Of Pneumocyst-
is Carinii By Lactoferrins Alone And In Combination With Pyrimethamine, Clarithromycin And
Minocycline. The Journal Of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, 46: 577582.
Coleman J. E. (1967). Mechanism Of Action Carbonic Anhydrase. J. Biol. Chem. 242: 5212-
5219
Conley M.E. and Delacroix D.L. (1987) Intravascular and Mucosal Immunoglobulin A: Two
Separate But Related Systems Of Immune Defense? Ann Intern Med. 106: 8929.
Coulson R. A. and Herbert J. D. (1984). A Role for Carbonic Anhydrase I In Intermediary Me-
tabolism. Ann. N. Acad. Sci. 429505-515.
Crosa J.H. (1989). Genetics and Molecular Biology Of Siderophore-Mediated Iron Transport In
Bacteria. Microbiological Reviews, 53: 517530.
Daniels T.E., Silverman S. Jr., Michalski J.P., Greenspan J.S., Path M.C.R., Sylvester R.A., et al.
(1975). The Oral Component of Sjogren's Syndrome. Oral Surg 39:875-885.

Page | 51

5
1
Davies, R.C. (1969). Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 178, 294-305.
Dawes C. (2004). How much saliva is enough for avoidance of xerostomia? Caries Res. 38:236
240.
De Laat P. C. J., M. R. Weemaes, R. Gonera, P. J. J. Van Munster, J. A. J. M. Bakkeren, and G.
B. A. Stoelinga (1991). Clinical Manifestations
Douglas C.R. and Tratado De Fisiologia (2002). Aplicada Sade. 5. Ed. So Paulo: Robe Edi-
torial.
Edgar M., Dawes C., OMullane (2004). Saliva and Oral Health. 3rd Ed. London: BDJ Books.
Edgar W.M. (1992). Saliva: Its Secretion, Composition and Functions. Br Dent J. 172:305-312.
Ekins A., Khan A.G., Shouldice S.R., Schryvers A.B. (2004): Lactoferrin Receptors In Gram-
Negative Bacteria: Insights Into The Iron Acquisition Process. Biometals. 17: 235243.
Ertugrul F., Elbek-Cubukcu C., Sabah E., Mir S. (2003). The Oral Health Status Of Children
Undergoing Hemodialysis Treatment. Turk J Pediatr. 45: 108-113.
Fejerskov, O., and Kidd, E. (2008). The Role of Saliva. In A.Bardow, F. Lagerlof, B. Nauntofte
& J.Tenovuo(Eds.), Dental Caries. The Disease And Its Clinical Management 2nd Edition (189-
207). Oxford: Blackwell Munksgaard Ltd.
Fox P.C., Busch K.A., Baum B.J. (1987). Subjective Reports Of Xerostomia And Objective
Measures Of Salivary Gland Performance. Am Dent Assoc 115:581-584.
Fujihara T., Hayashi K. (1995): Lactoferrin Inhibits Herpes Simplex Virus Type-1 (HSV-1) In-
fection To Mouse Cornea. Archives Of Virology, 140, 14691472.

Page | 52

5
2
Furmanski P., Li Z.P., Fortuna M.B., Swamy C.V.B., Das M.R. (1989): Multiple Molecular
Forms Of Human Lactoferrin. Identification Of A Class Of Lactoferrins That Possess Ribonu-
clease Activity And Lack Iron-Binding Capacity. The Journal Of Experimental Medicine, 170,
415429.
Goldblum RM, Hanson LA, Brandtzaeg P. The Mucosal Defense System. In: Stiehm ER, Editor.
Immunologic Disorders In Infants And Children, 4th Ed. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Co.; 1996.
P. 15999.
Gonzlez LFA, Snches MCR. La Saliva: Revisin Sobre Composicin, Funcin Y Usos Di-
agnsticos: Primera Parte. Univ Odontol. 2003; 23:18-24.
Harmsen M.C., Swart P.J., De Bethune M.P., Pauwels R., De Clercq E., The T.H., Meijer D.K.F.
(1995): Antiviral Effects Of Plasma And Milk Proteins: Lactoferrin Shows Potent Activity
Against Both Human Immunodeficiency Virus And Human Cytomegalovirus Replication In
Vitro. The Journal Of Infectious Diseases, 172, 380388.
Harold Marcotte And Marc C. Lavoie. Secretory Iga System. In Oral Microbial Ecology And
The Role Of Salivary Immunoglobulin A (Pp.82-98). Microbiology And Molecular Biology Re-
views, American Society For Microbiology.
Harp JA, Chen W, Harmsen AG. Resistance Of Severe Combined Immunodeficient Mice To In-
fection With Cryptosporidium Parvum: The Importance Of Intestinal Microflora. Infect Immun
1992; 60: 350912.
Heintze U, Birkhed D, Bjorn H (1983). Secretion Rate And Buffer Effect Of Resting And Stimu-
lated Whole Saliva As A Function Of Age And Sex. Swed Dent J 7:227-238.

Page | 53

5
3
Henry R P 1996 Multiple Roles Of Carbonic Anhydrase I In Cellular Transport And Metabo-
lism; Anu Rev. Physiol. 58 523-538
Holtje, J.V., EXS, 75, 105-110 (1996).
Humphrey SP, Williamson RT. A Review Of Saliva: Normal Composition, Flow, And Function.
J Prosthet Dent. 2001; 85:162-169.
Jaffe EC, Roberts GJ, Chantler C, Carter JE. Dental Findings In Chronic Renal Failure. Br Dent
J. 1986;160:18-20.
Jameson G.B., Anderson B.F., Norriss G.E., Thomas D.H., Baker E.N. (1998): Structure Of
Human Apolactoferrin At 2.0 A Resolution. Refinement And Analysis Of Ligand-Induced Con-
formational Change. Acta Crystallographica. Section D, Biological Crystallography, 54, 1319
1335.
Jenkins GN. The Physiology And Biochemistry Of The Mouth. 4th. Ed. Oxford: Blackwell Sci-
entific Publications; 1978.
Jensen SB, Pedersen AM, Reibel J, Nauntofte B. Xerostomia and hypofunction of the salivary
glands in cancer therapy. 2003; 11: 207225. [12673459]
Jolles, P., Angewandte Chemie, International Edition, 8, 227-239 (1969).
Kirkpatrick C.H., Green I., Rich R.R., Schade A.L. (1971): Inhibition Of Growth Of Candida
Albicans By Iron-Unsaturated Lactoferrin: Relation To Host-Defense Mechanisms In Chronic
Mucocutaneous Candidiasis. The Journal Of Infectious Diseases, 124, 539544.

Page | 54

5
4
Kivela J, Parkkila S, Parkkila A-K, Rajaniemi H (1999b). A Low Concentration Of Carbonic
Anhydrase Isoenzyme VI In Whole Saliva Is Associated With Caries Prevalence. Caries Res
33:178-184
Korsrud, F. R., And P. Brandtzaeg. 1980. Quantitative Immunochemistry Of Immunoglobulin
And J-Chain-Producing Cells In Human Parotid And Submandibular Salivary Glands. Immunol-
ogy 39:129140.
Lagerlof F, Oliveby A (1994). Caries-Protective Factors In Saliva Adv Dent Res 8:229-238.
Richard J. Lamont and Howard F. Jenkinson (2010) .Oral microbiology at a glance /.(At a glance
series). ISBN 978-0-8138-2892-3 (pbk. : alk. paper)
Legrand D., Elass E., Carpentier M., Mazurier J. (2005): Lactoferrin: A Modulator Of Immune
And Inflammatory Responses. Cellular And Molecular Life Sciences, 62, 25492559.
Legrand D., Elass E., Carpentier M., Mazurier J. (2005): Lactoferrin: A Modulator Of Immune
And Inflammatory Responses. Cellular And Molecular Life Sciences, 62, 25492559.
Leinonen J, Kivela J, Parkkila S, Parkkila A-K, Rajaniemi H (1999). Salivary Carbonic Anhy-
drase Isoenzyme VI Is Located In The Human Enamel Pellicle. Caries Res 33:185-190.
Leitch E.C., Willcox M.D. (1998): Synergic Antistaphylococcal Properties Of Lactoferrin And
Lysozyme. Journal Of Medical Microbiology, 47, 837842.
Liblau, R. S., And J.-F. Bach. 1992. Selective Iga Deficiency And Autoimmunity. Int. Arch. Al-
lergy Immunol. 99:1627.

Page | 55

5
5
Lindskog S, Engberg P, Forsman C, Ibrahim S A, Jonsson B H, Simosson I And Tibell L 1984
Kinetics And Mechanism Of Carbonic Anhydrase Isoenzymes; Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 429 61-75
Macdonald TT, Pettersson S. Bacterial Regulation Of Intestinal Immune Responses. Inflamm
Bowel Dis 2000; 6:11622.
Mackay BJ, Denepitiya L, Iacono VJ, Krost SB, Pollock JJ. Growth-Inhibitory And Bactericidal
Effects Of Human Parotid Salivary Histidine-Rich Polypeptides On Streptococcus Mutans. In-
fect Immun.1984;44:695-701.
Macpherson LMD, Dawes C. Urea Concentration In Minor Mucous Gland Secretions And The
Effect Of Salivary Film Velocity On Urea Metabolism By Streptococcus Vestibularis In An Arti-
ficial Plaque. J Periodontal Res. 1991;26:395-401.
Malamud D. Salivary Diagnostics: The Future Is Now. J Am Dent Assoc. 2006;137:284-286.
Mandel ID (1987). The Functions Of Saliva. Dent Res 66(Spec Iss):623-627.
Mandel ID (1989). The Role Of Saliva In Maintaining Oral Homeostasis. J Am Dent Assoc
119:298-304.
Marchetti M., Longhi C., Conte M.P., Pisani S., Valenti P., Seganti L. (1996): Lactoferrin Inhib-
its Herpes Simplex Virus Type 1 Adsorption To Vero Cells. Antiviral Research, 29, 221231.
Maren T H 1967. Carbonic Anhydrase: Chemistry, Physiology And Inhibition; Physiol. Rev. 47
595-771.
Maren T H 1991 The Links Among Biochemistry, Physiology And Pharmacology In Carbonic
Anhydrase Mediated Systems; In Carbonic Anhydrase, From Biochemistry, And Genetics To

Page | 56

5
6
Physiology And Clinical Medicine (Eds) F Botre, G Gros And B T Storey (VCH Publisher, FRG
And USA) Pp 186-207
Mazurier J., Spik G. (1980): Comparative Study Of The Iron-Binding Properties Of Human
Transferrins. I. Complete And Sequential Iron Saturation And Desaturation Of The Lactotrans-
ferrin. Biochimica Et Biophysica Acta, 629, 399408.
Meldrum N U And Roughton F J W 1933 Carbonic Anhydrase, Its Preparation And Properties;
J. Physiol. (London) 80113-142
Metz-Boutique M.H., Jolles J., Mazurier J., Schoentgen F., Legrand D., Spik G., Montreuil J.,
Jolles P. (1984): Human Lactotransferrin: Amino Acid Sequence And Structural Comparisons
With Other Transferrins. European Journal Of Biochemistry, 145, 659676.
Michalek, S. M., And N. K. Childers. 1990. Development And Outlook For A Caries Vaccine.
Crit. Rev. Oral Biol. Med. 1:3754.
Murakami Y, Tamagawa H, Shizukuishi S, Tsunemitsu A, Aimoto S. Biological Role Of An Ar-
ginine Residue Present In A Histidine-Rich Peptide Which Inhibits Hemagglutination Of Por-
phyromonas Gingivalis. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 1992;77:201-204.
Nagler RM. Salivary Glands And The Aging Process: Mechanistic Aspects, Health-Status And
Medicinal-Efficacy Monitoring. Biogerontology. 2004; 5:223-33.
Nikawa H, Samaranayake LP, Tenovuo J, Pang KM, Hamada T. The Fungicidal Effect Of Hu-
man Lactoferrin On Candida Albicans And Candida Krusei. Arch Oral Biol. 1993;38:1057-
1063.

Page | 57

5
7
Omata Y., Satake M., Maeda R., Saito A., Shimazaki K., Yamauchi K., Uzuka Y., Tanabe S.,
Sarashina T., Mikami T. (2001): Reduction Of The Infectivity Of Toxoplasma Gondii And Eime-
ria Stiedai Sporozoites By Treatment With Bovine Laktoferricin. The Journal Of Veterinary
Medical Science, 63, 187190.
Orndorff PE, Devapali A, Palestrant S, Wyse A, Everett ML, Bollinger RB, Parker W. Immuno-
globulinmediated Agglutination And Biofilm Formation By Escherichia Coli K-12 Requires The
Type 1 Pilus Fiber. Infect Immun 2004; 72: 192938.
Orsi N. (2004): The Antimicrobial Activity Of Lactofer-Rin: Current Status And Perspectives.
Biometals, 17, 189196.
Papas AS, Joshi A, Macdonald SL, Maravelis-Splagounias L, Pretara-Spanedda P, Curro FA
(1993). Caries Prevalence In Xerostomic Individuals. / Can Dent Assoc 59:171-179.
Pedersen AM, Bardow A, Jensen SB, Nauntofte B. Saliva and gastrointestinal functions of taste,
mastication, swallowing and digestion. Oral Dis 2002;8:117129. [12108756]
Petschow B.W., Talbott R.D., Batema R.P. (1999): Ability Of Lactoferrin To Promote The
Growth Of Bifidobacterium Spp. In Vitro Is Independent Of Receptor Binding Capacity And
Iron Saturation Level. Journal Of Medical Microbiology, 48, 541549.
Pocker Y And Meany J E 1965.The Catalytic Versatility Of Erythrocyte Carbonic Anhydrase 1:
Kinetic Studies Of The Enzyme Catalyzed Hydration Of Acetaldehyde; Biochemistry4 2535-
2541
Pocker Y And Stone J T 1965. The Catalytic Versatility Of Erythrocytec Arbonic Anhydmse.
The Enzyme Catalyzed Hydrolysis Of P-Nitrophenyl Acetate; J. Am. Chern. Soc. 87 5497-5498

Page | 58

5
8
Ratledge C., Dover L.G. (2000): Iron Metabolism In Pathogenic Bacteria. Annual Review Of
Microbiology, 54, 881941.
Rhodus NL, Moller K, Colby S, Bereuter J. Articulatory speech performance in patients with sal-
ivary gland dysfunction: a pilot study. Quintessence Int 1995;26:805810. [8628840]
Richard J. Lamont And Howard F. Jenkinson (2010). Anti-Microbial Properties Of Saliva. In
Richard J. Lamont And Howard F. Jenkinson, Oral Microbiology At A Glance 1st Edition (Pp. 8-
19). Wiley-Blackwell.
Rose-Ped AM, Bellm LA, Epstein JB, et al. Complications of radiation therapy for head and
neck cancers: the patients perspective. Cancer Nurs 2002;25:461467. [12464838]
Rossi P., Giansanti F., Boffi A., Ajello M., Valenti P., Chiancone E., Antonini G. (2002): Ca2+
Binding To Bovine Lactoferrin Enhances Protein Stability And Influences The Release Of Bac-
terial Lipopolysaccharide. Biochemistry And Cell Biology, 80, 4148.
Russell JI, Macfarlane TW, Aitchison TC, Stephen KW, Burchell CK (1990). Caries Prevalence,
Microbiological And Salivary Caries Activity Tests In Scottish Adolescents. Community Dent
Oral Epidemiol 18:120-125
Russell JI, Macfarlane TW, Aitchison TC, Stephen KW, Burchell CK (1991). Prediction Of Car-
ies Increment In Scottish Adolescents. Community Dental Oral Epidemioly 19:74-77.
Sanchez L., Calvo M., Brock J.H. (1992): Biological Role Of Lactoferrin. Archives Of Disease
In Childhood, 67, 657661.
Schenkels LC, Veerman EC, Nieuw Amerongen AV. Biochemical Composition Of Human Sali-
va In Relation To Other Mucosal Fluids. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 1995; 6:161-175.

Page | 59

5
9
Schryvers A.B., Bonnah R., Yu R.H., Wong H., Retzer M. (1998): Bacterial Lactoferrin Recep-
tors. Advances In Experimental Medicine And Biology, 443, 123133.
Scully C (1986). Sjogren's Syndrome: Clinical And Laboratory Features, Immuno-Pathogenesis,
And Management. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 62:10-23.
Sherman M.P., Bennett S.H., Hwang F.F., Yu C. (2004): Neonatal Small Bowel Epithelia: En-
hancing Anti-Bacterial Defense With Lactoferrin And Lactobacillus GG. Biometals, 17, 285
289.
Ship JA, Fox PC, Baum BJ (1991). How Much Saliva Is Enough? Normal Function Defined. I
Am Dent Assoc 122:63-69.
Shroff KE, Cebra JJ. Development Of Mucosal Humoral Immune Responses In Germ-Free (GF)
Mice. Adv Exp Med Biol 1995; 371A: 4416.
Shroff KE, Meslin K, Cebra JJ. Commensal Enteric Bacteria Engender A Self-Limiting Humoral
Mucosal Immune Response While Permanently Colonizing The Gut. Infect Immun 1995; 63:
390413.
Silverman D N And Lindskog S 1988 The Catalytic Mechanism Of Carbonic Anhydrase, Impli-
cation Of A Rate-Limiting Proteolysis Of Water; Acc. Chern. Res. 21 30-36
Singh P.K., Parsek M.R., Greenberg E.P., Welsh M.J. (2002): A Component Of Innate Immunity
Prevents Bacterial Biofilm Development. Nature, 417, 552555.
Spak CJ, Johnson G, Ekstrand J (1994). Caries Incidence, Salivary Flow Rate And Efficacy Of
Fluoride Gel Treatment In Irradiated Patients. Caries Res 28:388-393.

Page | 60

6
0
Stack KM, Papas AS. Xerostomia: Etiology And Clinical Management. Nutr Clin Care.
2001;4:15-21.
Stadie W C And Obrien H. 1933 The Catalysis Of The Hydration Of Carbon Dioxide And De-
hydration Of Carbonic Acid By An Enzyme Isolated From Red Blood Cells; J. Biol. Chern. 103
521-529
Swenson E R 1991 Distribution And Functions Of Carbonic Anhydrase 1 In The Gastrointestinal
Tract; In The Carbonic Anhydrase, Cellular Physiology And Molecular Genetics (Eds) S J Dod-
son, R E Tasman, G Gros And N D Carter (New York: Plenum Press) Pp 265-287
Tabak LA, Levine MJ, Mandel ID, Ellison SA. Role Of Salivary Mucins In The Protection Of
The Oral Cavity. J Oral Pathol. 1982;11:1-17.
Tachezy J., Kulda J., Bahnikova I., Suchan P., Razga J., Schrevel J. (1996): Tritrichomonas Foe-
tus: Iron Acquisition From Lactoferrin And Transferrin. Experimental Parasitology, 83, 216
228.
Tashian R E 1989. The Carbonic Anhydrases, Widening Perspectives On Their Evolution, Ex-
pression And Function; Bioessays 10 186-192
Ten Cate AR. Oral Histology: Development, Structure And Function. 5th Ed. St. Louis: Mosby;
1998.
Tenovuo J, Lagerlf F. Saliva. In: Thylstrup A, Fejerskov O. Textbook Of Clinical Cariology.
2nd Ed. Copenhagen: Munksgaard; 1994.
Tomasi, T. B. 1989. Regulation Of The Mucosal IGa Response: An Overview. Immunol. Invest.
18:115.

Page | 61

6
1
Turner RJ, Sugiya H. Understanding Salivary Fluid And Protein Secretion. Oral Dis. 2002;8:3-
11.
Valenti P., Antonini G. (2005): Lactoferrin: An Important Host Defense Against Microbial And
Viral Attack. Cellular And Molecular Life Sciences, 62, 25762587.
Van Der Reijden WA, Van Der Kwaak JS, Veerman ECI, Nieuw Amerongen AV (1996). Analy-
sis Of The Concentration And Output Of Whole Salivary Constituents In Patients With Sjogren's
Syndrome. Eur J Oral Sci 104:335-340.
Ward P.P., Zhou X., Conneely O.M. (1996): Cooperative Interactions Between The Amino- A
Carboxyl-Terminal Lobes Contribute To The Unique Iron-Binding Stability Of Lactoferrin. The
Journal Of Biological Chemistry, 271, 1279012794.
Washington N, Washington C, Wilson CG. Physiological Pharmaceutics: Barriers To Drug Ab-
sorption. London: CRC Press; 2000
Williams RC, Gibbons RJ. Inhibition Of Bacterial Adherence By Secretory Immunoglobulin A:
A Mechanism Of Antigen Disposal. Science 1972; 177:6979.
Xu T, Levitz SM, Diamond RD, Oppenheim FG. Anticandidal Activity Of Major Human Sali-
vary Histatins. Infect Immun. 1991;59:2549-2554.
Yamauchi K., Tomita M., Giehl T.J., Ellison R.T. (1993). Antibacterial Activity Of Lactoferrin
And Pepsin-Derived Lactoferrin Peptide Fragment: Infection And Immunity, 61: 719728.