| Literature DB >> 31781545 |
Jing-Shuai Wu1,2, Xiao-Hui Shi1,2, Ya-Hui Zhang1,2, Jia-Yin Yu1,2, Xiu-Mei Fu1,2, Xin Li1,2, Kai-Xian Chen3, Yue-Wei Guo3, Chang-Lun Shao1,2, Chang-Yun Wang1,2,4.
Abstract
The zoanthid-derived fungus Cochliobolus lunatus (TA26-46) has been proven to be a source of bioactive 14-membered resorcylic acid lactones (RALs). In the present study, chemical epigenetic manipulation was applied to this fungal strain with a DNA methyltransferase inhibitor resulting in the significant changes of the secondary metabolites. Cultivation of C. lunatus (TA26-46) with 10 μM 5-azacytidine in Czapek-Dox liquid medium led to the isolation of new types of metabolites, including two α-pyrones, cochliobopyrones A (1) and B (2), along with three isocoumarins (3-5) and one chromone (6). The planar structures of the new compounds (1-2) were elucidated by comprehensive analyses of NMR and HRESIMS data. Their challenging relative configurations were established by a combination of acetonide reaction, coupling constants and NOESY correlations analysis, and DP4+ probability calculation. Their absolute configurations were determined by comparing with the ECD calculation data of the fragment molecules, 6-(1,2-dihydroxypropyl)-4-methoxy-2H-pyran-2-ones. It is the first time to obtain α-pyrone compounds with the epoxy ring or bromine atom on the seven-numbered side chain. It could be concluded that chemical epigenetic agents could induce C. lunatus to produce new types of secondary metabolites differing from its original products (RALs).Entities:
Keywords: Cochliobolus lunatus; DNA methyltransferase inhibitor; DP4+ probability calculation; chemical epigenetic manipulation; the fragment molecules; α-pyrones
Year: 2019 PMID: 31781545 PMCID: PMC6857680 DOI: 10.3389/fchem.2019.00763
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Chem ISSN: 2296-2646 Impact factor: 5.221
1H NMR and 13C NMR Data for 1 and 2.
| 2 | 163.7, C | 163.4, C | ||
| 3 | 87.7, CH | 5.54, d (2.0) | 88.6, CH | 5.58, d (2.0) |
| 4 | 171.5, C | 171.2, C | ||
| 5 | 99.4, CH | 6.13, d (2.0) | 99.2, CH | 6.17, d (2.0) |
| 6 | 167.4, C | 164.8, C | ||
| 7 | 70.5, CH | 4.75, d (6.8) | 70.4, CH | 4.12, t (5.8) |
| 8 | 71.4, CH | 4.04, m | 57.0, CH | 3.07, dd (5.8, 2.0) |
| 9 | 62.9, CH | 4.12, m | 58.9, CH | 2.92, dd (4.0, 2.0) |
| 10 | 67.0, CH | 3.86, m | 68.0, CH | 3.41, m |
| 11 | 38.8, CH2 | 1.57, m | 36.5, CH2 | 1.37, m |
| 1.36, m | 1.31, m | |||
| 12 | 19.0, CH2 | 1.36, m | 18.3, CH2 | 1.37, m |
| 1.27, m | 1.31, m | |||
| 13 | 14.5, CH3 | 0.89, t (7.0) | 14.5, CH3 | 0.83, t (6.7) |
| 14 | 56.8, CH3 | 3.81, s | 56.8, CH3 | 3.83, s |
| 7-OH | 5.84, d (6.8) | 6.04, d (5.8) | ||
| 8-OH | 5.22, d (8.4) | |||
| 10-OH | 4.70, d (6.1) | 4.71, d (5.1) | ||
500 MHz for .
Figure 1HPLC profiles of EtOAc extracts of C. lunatus (TA26-46) cultured in Czapek-Dox liquid medium with 10 μM 5-azacytidine.
Figure 2The chemical structures of compounds 1–6.
Figure 31H–1H COSY and key HMBC correlations of compounds 1 and 2.
Figure 4The structure of compound 1a and its NOESY/NOE correlations.
Figure 5The structures of 1a-1 and 1a-2.
Figure 6The structures of 1F-1–1F-4.
Figure 7The experimental ECD spectra of 1–2 and calculated ECD spectra of 1F-1–1F-4.
Figure 8The possible biosynthesis of induced compounds 1 and 2.