| Literature DB >> 35200612 |
Rong Chao1, Gulab Said1,2, Qun Zhang1, Yue-Xuan Qi3, Jie Hu1,3, Cai-Juan Zheng4, Ji-Yong Zheng3, Chang-Lun Shao1,2, Guang-Ying Chen4, Mei-Yan Wei1,5.
Abstract
To enhance the biological activity of the natural product geodin (1), isolated from the marine-derived fungus Aspergillus sp., a series of new ether derivatives (2-37) was designed and semisynthesized using a high-yielding one-step reaction. In addition, the insecticidal and antibacterial activities of all geodin congeners were evaluated systematically. Most of these derivatives showed better insecticidal activities against Helicoverpa armigera Hübner than 1. In particular, 15 showed potent insecticidal activity with an IC50 value of 89 μM, comparable to the positive control azadirachtin (IC50 = 70 μM). Additionally, 5, 12, 13, 16, 30 and 33 showed strong antibacterial activity against Staphylococcus aureus and Aeromonas salmonicida with MIC values in the range of 1.15-4.93 μM. The preliminary structure-activity relationships indicated that the introduction of halogenated benzyl especially fluorobenzyl, into 1 and substitution of 4-OH could be key factors in increasing the insecticidal and antibacterial activities of geodin.Entities:
Keywords: Aspergillus sp.; antibacterial activity; geodin; insecticidal activity; semisynthesize
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35200612 PMCID: PMC8880215 DOI: 10.3390/md20020082
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mar Drugs ISSN: 1660-3397 Impact factor: 5.118
Figure 1The structures of griseofulvin and geodin (1) which share the same grisan backbone (rings A, B and C).
Scheme 1General semisynthetic strategy employed to make ether derivatives of 1.
Structures of compounds 2–37.
| No. | R | No. | R | No. | R |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insecticidal and antibacterial activities of compounds 1–37 a.
| No. | IC50 (μM) (μg/mL) | MIC (μM) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Insecticidal Activity | Antimicrobial Activity | |||
|
|
|
| ||
|
| 500 (200) | >50 | >50 | >50 |
|
| 176 (100) | >50 | 2.20 | >50 |
|
| 176 (100) | >50 | >50 | >50 |
|
| >350 (>200) | 17.60 | 8.80 | >50 |
|
| >381 (>200) | 4.77 | 4.77 | >50 |
|
| 190 (100) | 9.55 | 4.77 | >50 |
|
| 190 (100) | >50 | >50 | >50 |
|
| 179 (100) | 8.96 | 4.48 | >50 |
|
| 179 (100) | >50 | 4.48 | >50 |
|
| >325 (>200) | 16.25 | 4.06 | >50 |
|
| >325 (>200) | >50 | 8.13 | >50 |
|
| 197 (100) | 4.93 | 2.46 | >50 |
|
| 190 (100) | 4.76 | 1.19 | >50 |
|
| 190 (100) | 9.52 | 2.38 | >50 |
|
| 89 (50) | 8.91 | 2.23 | >50 |
|
| >368 (>200) | 4.60 | 1.15 | >50 |
|
| 172 (100) | 17.27 | >50 | >50 |
|
| 179 (100) | 8.97 | >50 | >50 |
|
| >358 (>200) | 17.94 | 8.97 | >50 |
|
| 179 (100) | 17.94 | 4.49 | >50 |
|
| >319 (>200) | >50 | 4.00 | >50 |
|
| 187 (100) | >50 | >50 | >50 |
|
| 198 (100) | >50 | >50 | >50 |
|
| >397 (>200) | >50 | >50 | >50 |
|
| nt | >50 | >50 | >50 |
|
| 366 (200) | >50 | 2.29 | >50 |
|
| 176 (100) | >50 | >50 | >50 |
|
| 169 (100) | >50 | >50 | >50 |
|
| >388 (>200) | 9.72 | >50 | >50 |
|
| 194 (100) | 4.86 | 4.86 | >50 |
|
| >369 (>200) | 9.23 | 4.62 | >50 |
|
| 184 (100) | 9.23 | 9.23 | >50 |
|
| >369 (>200) | 4.62 | 2.31 | >50 |
|
| 369 (200) | 9.23 | >50 | >50 |
|
| 170 (100) | >50 | 4.27 | >50 |
|
| >375 (>200) | 18.97 | >50 | >50 |
|
| >468 (>200) | >50 | >50 | 5.85 |
| Azadirachtin | 70 (50) | nt | nt | nt |
| Sea-Nine 211 | nt | nt | 0.27 | 0.27 |
| Ciprofloxacin | nt | 0.16 | nt | nt |
nt = not tested. a Results are the average of three independent experiments, each performed in duplicate. Standard deviations were less than ±10%.
Figure 2The derivative 15 with significant insecticidal activity.
Figure 3The selective derivatives with strong antibacterial activities.