| Literature DB >> 32413961 |
Sekelwa Cosa1, Jostina R Rakoma1, Abdullahi A Yusuf2, Thilivhali E Tshikalange3.
Abstract
Pseudomonas aeruginosa is the causative agent of several life-threatening human infections. Like many other pathogens, P. aeruginosa exhibits quorum sensing (QS) controlled virulence factors such as biofilm during disease progression, complicating treatment with conventional antibiotics. Thus, impeding the pathogen's QS circuit appears as a promising alternative strategy to overcome pseudomonas infections. In the present study, Calpurnia aurea were evaluated for their antibacterial (minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC)), anti-quorum sensing/antivirulence (AQS), and antibiofilm potential against P. aeruginosa. AQS and antivirulence (biofilm formation, swimming, and swarming motility) activities of plant extracts were evaluated against Chromobacterium violaceum and P. aeruginosa, respectively. The in vitro AQS potential of the individual compounds were validated using in silico molecular docking. Acetone and ethanolic extracts of C. aurea showed MIC at 1.56 mg/mL. The quantitative violacein inhibition (AQS) assay showed ethyl acetate extracts as the most potent at a concentration of 1 mg/mL. GCMS analysis of C. aurea revealed 17 compounds; four (pentadecanol, dimethyl terephthalate, terephthalic acid, and methyl mannose) showed potential AQS through molecular docking against the CviR protein of C. violaceum. Biofilm of P. aeruginosa was significantly inhibited by ≥60% using 1-mg/mL extract of C. aurea. Confocal laser scanning microscopy correlated the findings of crystal violet assay with the extracts significantly altering the swimming motility. C. aurea extracts reduced the virulence of pseudomonas, albeit in a strain- and extract-specific manner, showing their suitability for the identification of lead compounds with QS inhibitory potential for the control of P. aeruginosa infections.Entities:
Keywords: anti-quorum sensing; antipathogenic; biofilm formation; cell-to-cell communication; molecular docking; plant extract
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32413961 PMCID: PMC7287703 DOI: 10.3390/molecules25102283
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) mg/mL for plant extracts tested against the bacteria Pseudomonas aeruginosa.
| Plant Species | Extracting Solvents Ethanol Acetone Ethyl Acetate | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 1.56 | 1.56 | 6.25 |
|
| 6.25 | 6.25 | 6.25 |
|
| 6.25 | 6.25 | 6.25 |
| Positive and negative controls | |||
| Ciprofloxacin | 0.06 | ||
| 1% DMSO | ≥6.25 | ||
Figure 1Growth kinetics of Pseudomonas aeruginosa ATCC 9721, 1% DMSO-treated, and treatments with different Calpurnia aurea extracts prepared at 1 mg/mL incubated at 37 °C for 36 h. The experiments were in triplicates and values presented are means ± standard deviation. Ca.A, Ca.E, Ca.Y—Ca denotes C. aurea, A denotes acetone, E denotes ethanol, and Y denotes ethyl acetate extracts. Negative control is the bacteria treated with 1% DMSO. O.D.: optical density.
Qualitative anti-quorum sensing (AQS) activity against a biomonitor strain of Chromobacterium violaceum C. aurea extracts, where Ca.A = Acetone, Ca.E = Ethanol, and Ca.Y = Ethyl acetate extracts, respectively. R = Resistant, I = Intermediate, and S = Susceptible.
| Zone Diameters (mm) and Associated Susceptibility Phenotypes | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Concentration (mg/mL) | Ca.A | Ca.E | Ca.Y |
| 0.5 | 0.00 (R) | 0.00 (R) | 0.00 (R) |
| 1 | 8.00 (R) | 8.00 (R) | 0.00 (R) |
| 1.5 | 9.00 (R) | 8.25 (R) | 0.00 (R) |
| 2 | 10.00 (R) | 11.00 (I) | 0.00 (R) |
| 2.5 | 11.00 (I) | 12.00 (S) | 9.00 (R) |
| Positive and Negative Controls | |||
| Ciprofloxacin (5 µg/mL) | 29.30 (S) | ||
| DMSO (1%) | 0.00 (R) | ||
Figure 2Violacein production by Chromobacterium violaceum ATCC 12472 at different concentrations. C. aurea extracts: Ca.E—Ethanol, Ca.A—Acetone, and Ca.Y—Ethyl acetate extract. Data presented are mean ± SD, n = 3. Different letters represent statistical difference at p-value = 0.05 (GLM: generalized linear model and LSD: least significant difference).
Chemical components tentatively identified from ethanolic extracts of Calpurnia aurea using a gas chromatograph-mass spectrometer (GC-MS).
| Peak | Ret. Time | Name | MS Fragmentation | Chemical Class | Area% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 8.878 | n-Teteradecane | 198, 169, 141, 113, 99 | Hydrocarbon | 0.75 |
| 2 | 11.303 | 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid | 293, 167, 149, 127 | Organic acid | 2.76 |
| 3 | 11.921 | 1,4-Benzenedicarboxylic acid diethyl ester | 222, 194, 177, 149 | Organic acid ester | 20.49 |
| 4 | 12.141 | Methyl mannose | 194, 177, 145, 115, 87 | Sugar | 15.76 |
| 5 | 13.301 | n-Nonadecane | 268, 196, 169, 141, 131, 99 | Hydrocarbon | 1.12 |
| 6 | 13.713 | Phthalic acid undecene-undecyl ester | 321, 304, 271, 167, 149, 132 | Organic acid ester | 3.79 |
| 7 | 14.115 | Tetramethyl-2-hexadece-nol | 296, 193, 138, 123, 96, 81 | Alcohol | 0.83 |
| 8 | 14.500 | Beta-H-pregna | 288, 165, 151, 125, 113, 125, 97, 57 | Steroid | 0.41 |
| 9 | 16.159 | Terephthalic acid, ethyl isobutyl ester | 250, 233, 195, 177, 149, 121, 84 | Organic acid ester | 3.96 |
| 10 | 16.243 | Pentadecanol | 210, 182, 168, 154, 140, 125, 111, 97, 83 | Alcohol | 14.54 |
| 11 | 18.322 | Hexadecanol | 224, 16, 168, 154, 139, 125, 111, 97 | Alcohol | 0.63 |
| 12 | 19.132 | Octadecanol | 252, 224, 210, 196, 182,168, 153, 139,125, 111, 97 | Alcohol | 1.70 |
| 13 | 20.055 | 2-(1 | 334, 277, 253, 213, 199, 183 | Organic acid | 1.06 |
| 14 | 22.170 | Octadecanal | 268, 250, 224, 222, 208, 194,182 | Aldehyde | 1.01 |
| 15 | 25.310 | Eicosanol | 298, 280, 253, 167, 139, 125 | Alcohol | 12.12 |
| 16 | 27.085 | Stigmasterol | 412, 351, 300, 271, 255, 159 | Steroid | 0.65 |
| 17 | 28.973 | Tetracosanal | 352, 334, 306, 278, 250, 208 | Aldehyde | 3.94 |
Figure 3Representative total ion chromatogram (TIC) of the ethanolic extract of Calpurnia aurea. Peak numbers and their identities correspond to those in Table 3.
Figure 42-dimensional structures of the compounds identified from the Calpurnia aurea extract used in molecular docking against the Chromobacterium violacein CviR protein. (A) = Dimethyl terephthalate, (B) = Methyl mannose, (C) = Phthalic acid undecene-undecyl ester, (D) = Teraphthalic acid, ethyl isobutyl ester, (E) = Pentadecanol, (F) = Eicosanol, (G) = Tetracosanol, (H) = Vanillin, and (I) = Quercetin. Vanillin and quercetin served as positive anti-quorum sensing (AQS) controls.
Figure 5Interaction and binding of selected test compounds against the C. violaceum CviR protein active site. The negatively charged protein residues are indicated in red, polar residues are in cyan, hydrophobic residues are shown in parrot green, hydrogen interactions (H-bonds) are presented as pink/purple arrows, pi–pi stacking is shown as a green line, and the pi cation as a red line. (A)—Pentadecanol, (B)—Dimethyl terephthalate, (C)—Terephthalic acid, (D)—Methyl mannose, (E,E)—Vanillin, and (F)—Quercertin.
Binding analysis of 10 selected compounds identified from ethanolic extracts of Calpurnia aurea.
| Compound | Total Energy | Docking Score | Glide Energy | H Bond |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pentadecanol | 3.860 | −3.758 | −32.825 | −0.358 |
| Dimethyl terephthalate | 6.895 | −5.486 | −34.901 | −0.237 |
| Phthalic acid | - | - | - | - |
| Eicosanol | - | - | - | - |
| Tetracosanal | - | - | - | - |
| Terephthalic acid | 24.218 | −6.186 | −26.550 | −0.385 |
| Didecyl phthalate | - | - | - | - |
| Methyl mannose | 9.681 | −7.000 | −37.276 | −2.598 |
| Vanillin | 14.223 | −4.880 | −25.901 | −0.872 |
| Quercetin | 25.683 | −10.613 | −44.877 | −2.643 |
Figure 6Antibiofilm activities of Calpurnia aurea extracts at 1 mg/mL against Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Ca.A—Acetone, Ca.E—Ethanol, and Ca.Y—Ethyl acetate extract. Data presented as mean ± standard deviation of three replicates, n = 3. Different letters represent statistical differences at p-value = 0.05 (GLM and LSD).
Figure 7Observation of P. aeruginosa cells treated and untreated with test extracts of C. aurea ethanol, acetone, and ethyl acetate using confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM). (A)—P. aeruginosa ATCC 9721 cells treated 1% DMSO, (B)—Cells treated with C. aurea ethanol extract, (C)—image showing dead cells only treated with C. aurea ethanol extract, and (D)—Combination of live and dead cells treated with C. aurea ethanol extract. (E)—Cells treated with ciprofloxacin (0.06 mg/mL). (F–H) represent cells treated with ethanol, acetone, and ethyl acetate extracts, respectively. Live cells staining appear green, while dead cells show red fluorescence.
Figure 8Representative images (i) and bar graph (ii) of P. aeruginosa (ATCC 9721) swimming (closed bars) and swarming (open bars) motility in the presence of various plant extracts (1 mg/mL) after 24 h at 37 °C incubation. Top row: swimming motility and bottom row: swarming motility. (A) negative control (untreated bacteria), and (B–D) represents P. aeruginosa treated with C. aurea ethanol, acetone, and ethyl acetate, respectively. Ca.E—Ethanol, Ca.A—Acetone, and Ca.Y—Ethyl acetate extracts. Data presented as averages.