| Literature DB >> 35464355 |
Shamsaldeen Ibrahim Saeed1,2, AhmedElmontaser Mergani3,4,5, Erkihun Aklilu1, Nor Fadhilah Kamaruzzman1.
Abstract
Antimicrobial therapy is the most applied method for treating and preventing bacterial infection in livestock. However, it becomes less effective due to the development of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Therefore, there is an urgent need to find new antimicrobials to reduce the rising rate of AMR. Recently, antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) have been receiving increasing attention due to their broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity, rapid killing activities, less toxicity, and cell selectivity. These features make them potent and potential alternative antimicrobials to be used in animals. Here, we discuss and summarize the AMPs in animals, classification, structures, mechanisms of action, and their potential use as novel therapeutic alternative antimicrobials to tackle the growing AMR threat.Entities:
Keywords: alternative antimicrobial; antimicrobial peptides (AMPs); antimicrobial resistance (AMR); bacterial infection; livestock
Year: 2022 PMID: 35464355 PMCID: PMC9024325 DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2022.851052
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Vet Sci ISSN: 2297-1769
Figure 1Classification of AMPs.
Summary of some selected AMPs and their mechanisms of action.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plectasin | Fungi | Gram-positive bacteria | Interrupting cell wall biosynthesis | ( |
| Nisin | Bacteria | Gram-positive bacteria | Pore formation in the bacterial cell membrane and interrupting cell wall biosynthesis | ( |
| Peptaibols | Fungi | Fungi and bacteria | Permeabilize bacterial membrane | ( |
| Protegrin | Porcine lung and intestine | Gram-negative, gram-positive bacteria, and yeast | Pore formation in the bacterial cell membrane and immunomodulation | ( |
| PR-39 | Porcine intestine, upper and lower respiratory tract | Gram-negative bacteria and | It inhibits protein and DNA and synthesis by exerting proteolytic activity and acts as a calcium-dependent chemoattractant for neutrophil | ( |
| SMAP29 | Ovine myeloid cells | Gram-negative, gram-positive bacteria, and yeast | Permeabilize bacterial membrane | ( |
| Bovine lactoferrcin (lfcin) | Bovine | Bacteria, fungi, virus, and parasite | Bind and realized LPS from bacteria and disruption the cell membrane | ( |
| Indolicidin | Mammalian | Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, yeast, and fungi | Membrane thinning, disruption of the membrane by channel formation, inhibition of DNA synthesis, and topoisomerase 1 | ( |
| Bovine Psoriasin | Bovine | Gram-negative bacteria | Reduces bacterial survival by zinc sequestration | ( |
| Buforin 2 | Amphibia | Fungi, Gram-positive, and Gram-negative bacteria | Targeting the biosynthesis of RNA | ( |
Figure 2The diagram illustrated the main structural classes of AMPs: (A) β-sheet, defensins, and protegrins; (B) extended, indolicidin; (C) α-helical, nisin, and lactoferricin; (D) loop or combined structure, plectasin. The image was created using UCSF Chimera (http://www.cgl.ucsf.edu/chimera).
Figure 3The interaction between peptide and bacterial cellular membrane. The image was created using BioRender illustrator (https://Biorender.com/).
Figure 4Mechanism for intracellular antimicrobial peptide activity. The image was created using BioRender illustrator (https://Biorender.com/).
Antimicrobial activity of the peptide-based antimicrobial compound against pathogenic bacteria isolated from livestock.
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plectasin |
| 3–6 | ( |
| Nisin | 30 | ( | |
| Lactoferrcin (lfcin) | 20-100 | ( | |
| Indolicidin | 4 | ( | |
| Cathelicidins Bac5 | 0.5–1 | ( | |
| Cathelicidins BMAP-28 | 2–8 | ( | |
| Cathelicidins BMAP-27 | 0.5–4 | ( |
Figure 5The diagram illustrates the peptide structure for plectasin (A), nisin (B), lactoferricin (C), and indolicin (D). The image was created using UCSF Chimera (http://www.cgl.ucsf.edu/chimera).