| Literature DB >> 30127313 |
Decha Kumla1,2, José A Pereira3,4, Tida Dethoup5, Luis Gales6,7, Joana Freitas-Silva8,9, Paulo M Costa10,11, Michael Lee12, Artur M S Silva13, Nazim Sekeroglu14, Madalena M M Pinto15,16, Anake Kijjoa17,18.
Abstract
A previously unreported chromene derivative, 1-hydroxy-12-methoxycitromycin (1c), and four previously undescribed chromone derivatives, including pyanochromone (3b), spirofuranochromone (4), 7-hydroxy-6-methoxy-4-oxo-3-[(1E)-3-oxobut-1-en-1-yl]-4H-chromene-5-carboxylic acid (5), a pyranochromone dimer (6) were isolated, together with thirteen known compounds: β-sitostenone, ergosterol 5,8-endoperoxide, citromycin (1a), 12-methoxycitromycin (1b), myxotrichin D (1d), 12-methoxycitromycetin (1e), anhydrofulvic acid (2a), myxotrichin C (2b), penialidin D (2c), penialidin F (3a), SPF-3059-30 (7), GKK1032B (8) and secalonic acid A (9), from cultures of the marine sponge- associated fungus Penicillium erubescens KUFA0220. Compounds 1a⁻e, 2a, 3a, 4, 7⁻9, were tested for their antibacterial activity against Gram-positive and Gram-negative reference and multidrug-resistant strains isolated from the environment. Only 8 exhibited an in vitro growth inhibition of all Gram-positive bacteria whereas 9 showed growth inhibition of methicillin-resistant Staphyllococus aureus (MRSA). None of the compounds were active against Gram-negative bacteria tested.Entities:
Keywords: Aspergillaceae; GKK 1032B; Neopetrosia sp.; Penicillium erubescens; antibacterial activity; chromone derivatives; marine sponge-associated fungus; pyranochromone; spirofuranochromone
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30127313 PMCID: PMC6117697 DOI: 10.3390/md16080289
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mar Drugs ISSN: 1660-3397 Impact factor: 5.118
Figure 1The structures of some secondary metabolites, isolated from cultures of the marine sponge-associated fungus P. erubescens KUFA 0220.
The 1H and 13C NMR (DMSO-d6, 500.13 and 125.4 MHz) and HMBC assignment for 1c.
| Position | δC, Type | δH, ( | HMBC |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 59.5, CH2 | 4.41, brs | C-2, 5 |
| 2 | 167.3, C | - | - |
| 3 | 104.1, CH | 6.25, s | C-1, 2, 5 |
| 4 | 174.8, CO | - | - |
| 5 | 111.2, C | - | - |
| 6 | 62.6, CH2 | 5.02, s | C-4, 5, 7, 9 |
| 7 | 155.2, C | - | - |
| 8 | 105.9, C | - | - |
| 9 | 152.2, C | - | |
| 10 | 106.5, CH | 6.44, s | C-7, 8, 9, 11, 12 |
| 11 | 151.9, C | - | - |
| 12 | 143.6, C | - | - |
| 13 | 110.7, CH | 7.15, s | C-7, 8, 9, 11, 12 |
| OCH3-12 | 56.4, CH3 | 3.80 | C-12 |
The 1H and 13C NMR of 3a (DMSO-d6, 300.13 and 75.4 MHz) and 3b (DMSO, 500.13 and 125.4 MHz).
| 3a | 3b | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Position | δC, Type | δH, ( | δC, Type | δH, ( |
| 1 | 28.4, CH3 | 1.45, s | 22.4, CH3 | 1.44, s |
| 2 | 94.2, C | - | 97.7, C | - |
| 3 | 37.5, CH2 | 2.55, d (17.5) | 37.1, CH2 | 2.63, dd (17.6, 2.6) |
| 2.87, d (17.5) | 2.96, dd (17.6, 2.6) | |||
| 4 | 158.7, C | - | 157.9, C | - |
| 5 | 113.5, C | - | 113.0, C | - |
| 6 | 56.3, CH2 | 4.45, s | 52.7, CH2 | 4.22, dt (14.9, 0.9) |
| - | 4.52, dd (14.9, 2.1) | |||
| 7 | 173.4, CO | - | 173.2, CO | - |
| 8 | 115.4, C | - | 115.4, C | - |
| 9 | 152.1, C | - | 152.1, C | - |
| 10 | 102.7, CH | 6.83, s | 102.7, CH | 6.83, s |
| 11 | 150.8, C | - | 150.8, C | - |
| 12 | 144.3, C | - | 144.4, C | - |
| 13 | 107.4, CH | 7.26, s | 107.4, CH | 7.26, s |
| OCH3 | - | - | 48.3, CH3 | 3.21, s |
Figure 2The most stable APFD/6-311+G(2d,p) conformation of 3a (C-2R). The asymmetric carbon is presented with the hydroxyl group facing straight down.
Figure 3The experimental (solid line, left axis) and simulated (dotted line, right axis) ECD spectra of 3a/C-2(R). The ECD experimental signal was very weak, requiring the use of 40 accumulations, increased digital integration time and post-acquisition noise filtering (moving mean).
Figure 4The formation of 3a, 2b and a pair of enantiomers of 3b by nucleophilic addition of methanol to 2b.
The 1H and 13C NMR (DMSO-d6, 300.13 and 75.4 MHz) and HMBC assignment for 4.
| Position | Δc, Type | δH, ( | COSY | HMBC |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2a | 69.8, CH2 | 4.49, d (12.4) | 2b | C-4, 4′, 8a |
| 2b | 4.63, d (12.4) | 2a | C-3, 4, 4′, 8a- | |
| 3 | 86.3, C | - | - | - |
| 4 | 181.6, CO | - | - | - |
| 4a | 111.1, C | - | - | - |
| 5 | 110.3, CH | 7.05, s | - | C-4, 6, 7, 8a |
| 6 | 141.9, C | - | - | - |
| 7 | 155.9, C | - | - | - |
| 8 | 103.2, CH | 6.41, s | - | C-4, 4a, 6, 7, 8a |
| 8a | 156.9, C | - | - | - |
| 2′ | 191.4, C | - | - | - |
| 3′ | 103.8, CH | 5.68, d (0.8) | 5′ | C-2′, 3, 4′ |
| 4′ | 198.3, CO | - | - | - |
| 5′ | 16.4, CH3 | 2.31, s | 3′ | C-2′, 3′ |
| OH | - | 10.01, brs | - | - |
Figure 5The Ortep view of 4.
The 1H and 13C NMR (DMSO-d6, 500.13 and 125.4 MHz) and HMBC assignment for 5.
| Position | δC, Type | δH, ( | HMBC |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 158.9, CH | 8.73, s | C-3, 4, 8a, 10 |
| 3 | 117.4, C | - | - |
| 4 | 173.4, CO | - | - |
| 4a | 112.0, C | - | - |
| 5 | * | - | - |
| 6 | 143.2, C | - | - |
| 7 | 157.1 | - | - |
| 8 | 104.0, CH | 7.03, s | - |
| 8a | 152.8, C | - | - |
| 9 | 167.1, CO | - | - |
| 10 | 134.9, CH | 7.35, s | 2, 4, 12 |
| 11 | 128.7, CH | 7.35, s | 3 |
| 12 | 198.2, CO | - | - |
| 13 | 17.5, CH3 | 2.29, s | 11, 12 |
| OCH3-6 | 61.0, CH3 | 3.75, s | 6 |
* not observed.
Figure 6The Ortep view of 5.
The 1H and 13C NMR (DMSO-d6, 500.13 and 125.4 MHz) and HMBC assignment for 6.
| Position | δC, Type | δH, ( | COSY | HMBC |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 161.3, C | - | - | - |
| 3 | 112.3, C | - | - | - |
| 4 | 172.2, CO | - | - | - |
| 4a | 115.1, C | - | - | - |
| 5 | 108.0, CH | 7.26, s | - | C-4, 6, 7, 8a |
| 6 | 144.7, C | - | - | - |
| 7 | 150.2, C | - | - | - |
| 8 | 102.8, CH | 6.84, s | - | C-4, 4a, 6, 7, 8a |
| 8a | 152.5, C | - | - | |
| 9α | 33.4 CH2 | 3.47, d (19.2) | H-9β | C-2, 3, 10, 13, 15 |
| 9β | 2.98, d (19.2) | H-9α | C-2, 3, 10, 13, 15 | |
| 10 | 78.2, C | - | - | - |
| 12 | 71.4, CH | 5.41, s | - | C-2, 3, 3′,4, 4′, 10, 14 |
| 13 | 29.3, CH3 | 1.51, s | - | C-2, 9, 10, 14, 15 |
| 14 | 200.9, CO | - | - | - |
| 15 | 69.8, CH | 5.23, s | H-17 | C-9, 10, 13, 14, 16 |
| 16 | 204.6, CO | - | - | - |
| 17 | 32.7, CH3 | 2.16, s | H-15 | C-15, 16 |
| 2′α | 67.7, CH2 | 4.36, d (12.8) | H-2′β | C-3′, 4, 8′a, 12, 14 |
| 2′β | 3.59, d (12.8) | H-2′α, 15 | C-3′, 4, 8′a, 12, 14 | |
| 3′ | 61.9, C | - | - | - |
| 4′ | 185.3, CO | - | - | - |
| 4′a | 109.8, C | - | - | - |
| 5′ | 111.1, CH | 7.17, s | - | C-4′, 6′, 7′, 8′a |
| 6′ | 141.1, C | - | - | - |
| 7′ | 155.4, C | - | - | - |
| 8′ | 102.6, CH | 6.37, s | - | C-4′, 4′a, 6′, 8′a |
| 8′a | 156.0, C | - | - | - |
Figure 7The most stable APFD/6-31G conformation of 6, presented with the absolute configuration found by spectrometric methods.
Figure 8The experimental (solid line, left axes) and simulated (dotted line, right axes) ECD spectra of four diastereoisomers of 6. The best experimental-simulated fit belongs to the diastereoisomer with the absolute configuration 10S, 12S, 3′S, 15S. The theoretical ECD spectra of the enantiomers of the presented diastereoisomers are the exact inversions of the ones depicted here and do not fit the experimental data.
The 1H and 13C NMR (DMSO-d6, 500.13 and 125.4 MHz) and HMBC assignment for 7.
| Position | δC, Type | δH, ( | HMBC |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 125.7, CH | 8.00, s | C-3, 4a, 9′ |
| 2 | 129.5, C | - | - |
| 3 | 138.0, C | - | - |
| 4 | 132.2, C | - | - |
| 4a | 152.1, C | - | - |
| 5 | 103.1, CH | 6.93, s | C-7, 8a, 10a |
| 6 | 150.9, C | - | - |
| 7 | 144.3, C | - | - |
| 8 | 108.7, C | 7.45, s | C-6, 7, 9, 10a |
| 8a | 113.5, C | - | - |
| 9 | 173.5, CO | - | - |
| 9a | 118.6, C | - | - |
| 10a | 154.2, C | - | - |
| 11 | 16.6, CH3 | 2.32, s | C-2, 3, 4 |
| 12 | 202.8, CO | - | - |
| 13 | 32.4, CH3 | 2.71, s | C-12 |
| 2′ | 66.2, CH2 | 4.67, s | C-3′, 4′, 8′a, 9′ |
| 3′ | 103.9, C | - | - |
| 4′ | 183.6, CO | - | - |
| 4′a | 111.9, C | - | - |
| 5′ | 110.5, CH | 7.19, s | C-4′, 6′, 7′, 8′a |
| 6′ | 155.9, C | - | - |
| 7′ | 141.6, C | - | - |
| 8′ | 103.3, CH | 6.34, s | C-4′a, 6′, 7, 8′a |
| 8′a | 154.9, C | - | - |
| 9′ | 172.6, C | - | - |
The antibacterial activity of 8 against a Gram-positive reference and multidrug-resistant strains. MIC and MBC are expressed in mg/mL.
| Strains | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disc diffusion | + | + | + | + | + | + |
| MIC | 8 | 16 | 32 | 8 | 32 | >64 |
| MBC | >64 | >64 | 64 | >64 | >64 | >64 |
MIC, minimal inhibitory concentration; MBC, minimal bactericidal concentration; VRE, vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus; MRSA, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus; (-), no inhibition halo; (+), 7–9 mm inhibition halo.
The classification of the ability of E. faecalis ATCC 29212 to adhere to and form biofilm after exposure to 1a–e, 2a, 3a, 4, 7–9, in comparison to the untreated control.
| Compound | Concentration (mg/L) | OD ± SD | Classification |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 64 | 1.205 ± 0.025 | strong |
|
| 64 | 1.547 ± 0.218 | strong |
|
| 64 | 1.673 ± 0.308 | strong |
|
| 64 | 1.522 ± 0.308 | strong |
|
| 32 | 1.378 ± 0.378 | strong |
|
| 64 | 1.136 ± 0.138 | strong |
|
| 64 | 2.128 ± 0.248 | strong |
|
| 64 | 0.867 ± 0.280 | strong |
|
| 64 | 1.192 ± 0.239 | strong |
|
| 16 (2 × MIC) | 0.089 ± 0.002 | weak |
|
| 8 (MIC) | 0.099 ± 0.006 | weak |
|
| 4 (1/2 MIC) | 1.884 ± 0.220 | strong |
|
| 2 (1/4MIC) | 2.358 ± 0.416 | strong |
|
| 64 | 0.263 ± 0.014 | moderate |
| None | 0 | 0.080 ± 0.002 | strong |
OD = optical density; SD = standard deviation; The classification used is based on criteria in [19], Average OD value for negative control was found to be 0.055 ± 0.002, therefore the optical cut-off value (ODc) is equal to 0.055 + (3 × 0.002) = 0.061; 2 × ODc = 0.122; 4 × ODc = 0.244.
The combined effect of clinically used antibiotics with 1a–e, 2a, 3a, 4, 7–9 against multidrug-resistant strains. MICs are expressed in mg/mL.
| Compound | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CTX | VAN | VAN | OXA | |||||
| Disc Diffusion | MIC | Disc Diffusion | MIC | Disc Diffusion | MIC | Disc Diffusion | MIC | |
| Antibiotic | + | 512 | - | 1024 | - | 1024 | - | 64 |
| Antibiotic + | - | 512 | - | 1024 | - | 1024 | - | 64 |
| Antibiotic + | + | 512 | - | 1024 | - | 1024 | - | 64 |
| Antibiotic + | - | >512 | - | 1024 | - | 1024 | - | 64 |
| Antibiotic + | - | 512 | - | 512 | - | 1024 | - | 64 |
| Antibiotic + | - | 512 | - | 1024 | - | >1024 | - | 64 |
| Antibiotic + | - | 512 | - | 1024 | - | 1024 | - | 64 |
| Antibiotic + | - | 512 | - | 512 | - | 1024 | - | 64 |
| Antibiotic + | - | 512 | - | 1024 | - | 1024 | - | 64 |
| Antibiotic + | - | >512 | - | 1024 | - | 1024 | - | 64 |
| Antibiotic + | - | 512 | + | * | - | * | - | 64 |
| Antibiotic + | - | 512 | - | 512 | - | 512 | - | 64 |
MIC = minimal inhibitory concentration; (-) = no inhibition halo or no increase in the inhibition halo; (+) = halo of inhibition or increase of the inhibition halo by 2 mm; CTX = cefotaxime; VAN = vancomycin; OXA = oxacillin. * For this compound, the checkerboard assay was performed and, with FICI = 0.7 for E. faecalis B3/101 and FICI = 2 for E. faecium 1/6/63, no interaction between 8 and VAN was found (0.5 < FICI ≤ 4, ‘no interaction’).