| Literature DB >> 22071446 |
Bassem Sadek1, Moawia Mohammad Al-Tabakha, Khairi Mustafa Salem Fahelelbom.
Abstract
A new series of 1,3-thiazole and benzo[d]thiazole derivatives 10-15 has been developed, characterized, and evaluated for in vitro antimicrobial activity at concentrations of 25-200 μg/mL against Gram+ve organisms such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), Gram-ve organisms such as Escherichia coli (E. coli), and the fungal strain Aspergillus niger (A. niger) by the cup plate method. Ofloxacin and ketoconazole (10 μg/mL) were used as reference standards for antibacterial and antifungal activity, respectively. Compounds 11 and 12 showed notable antibacterial and antifungal activities at higher concentrations (125-200 μg/mL), whereas benzo[d]thiazole derivatives 13 and 14 were found to display significant antibacterial or antifungal activity (50-75 μg/mL) against the Gram+ve, Gram-ve bacteria, or fungal cells used in the present study. In addition, a correlation between calculated and determined partition coefficient (log P) was established which allows future development of compounds within this series to be carried out based on calculated log P values. Moreover, compounds 13 and 14 show that the optimum logarithm of partition coefficient (log P) should be around 4.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 22071446 PMCID: PMC6264350 DOI: 10.3390/molecules16119386
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Lead compound 4-(4-hydroxyphenyl)-2-methyl-1,3-thiazole and newly developed compounds 10–15.
Scheme 2Synthesis of thiazole derivatives 10–15.
Antimicrobial activity of the title compounds along with the experimental “log P” and the calculated “Clog P”.
| MIC µg/mL | Lipophilicity | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Compound | Structural formula |
|
|
| Log P | Clog P ** | ||
|
|
| 150 * | 200 * | 150 * | 2.68 | 2.89 | ||
|
|
| 200 | 200 | 200 | 3.41 | 3.20 | ||
|
|
| 150 | 200 | 150 | 4.65 | 4.24 | ||
|
|
| 125 | 150 | 125 | 4.45 | 4.24 | ||
|
|
| 50 | 50 | 75 | 3.86 | 4.07 | ||
|
|
| 50 | 75 | 50 | 3.83 | 4.05 | ||
|
|
| 125 | 125 | 125 | 2.98 | 3.14 | ||
|
| 10 | 12.5 | -- | -- | -- | |||
|
| -- | -- | 12.5 | -- | -- | |||
* Previously published [18]; ** Using ALOGPS 2.1 software
Figure 2Correlations between the experiemtnal and the calculated log P.
Figure 3Influence of the prepared compounds lipophilicity determined experimentally “log P” (Figure 3a) and as predicted “Clog P” (Figure 3b).