| Literature DB >> 36013310 |
Ayu Rahmania Lestari1, Irmanida Batubara1,2, Setyanto Tri Wahyudi2,3, Auliya Ilmiawati1,2, Suminar Setiati Achmadi1,2.
Abstract
Uric acid, which causes gout, is the end product of purine catabolism, synthesized by xanthine oxidase, guanine deaminase, adenine deaminase, purine nucleoside phosphorylase, and 5-nucleotidase II. Garlic contains bioactive compounds that have potential as antigout agents. Garlic fermentation to black garlic changes its components, which may affect its beneficial potential. This study aimed to select types of garlic (Indonesian garlic) and imported garlic, and to predict the interaction between their compounds and five target proteins through an in silico approach and a multivariate analysis, namely partial least squares-discriminant analysis (PLS-DA), to determine their different constituents. The target proteins were collected from open-access databases, and the compounds were identified using mass spectrometry data. The PLS-DA score plot succeeded in classifying the samples into three classes, with each class having a discriminatory compound. Based on the in silico studies, we predicted the best binding score of the five target proteins with seven important compounds: alliin, N-acetyl-S-allyl-L-cysteine, ajoene, pyridoxal, pyridoxamine, 4-guanidinobutyric acid, and D-glucosamine. These were mostly found in black garlic, with no different concentrations in the local and imported samples. Through this approach, we concluded that black garlic is a better candidate for antigout treatments, as several compounds were found to have good binding to the target proteins.Entities:
Keywords: LC-MS/MS; PLS-DA; black garlic; compound–protein interaction; drug discovery; in silico; mass spectrum; metabolomics
Year: 2022 PMID: 36013310 PMCID: PMC9409881 DOI: 10.3390/life12081131
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Life (Basel) ISSN: 2075-1729
Figure 1LC-MS/MS chromatogram of garlic extract (A) and black garlic extract (B); Local garlic extract (green), imported garlic (blue), local black garlic (light blue), imported black garlic (orange).
Figure 2PLS-DA score plot of garlic (Class 1: imported black garlic (F), class 2: local black garlic (E), and class 3: imported and local garlic (A and B)).
Figure 3Biplots of imported black garlic (class 1), local black garlic (class 2), and imported and local garlic (class 3).
Figure 4Target protein RMSD values during the 100-ns simulation (Green = ADA, yellow = GDA, orange = XO, brown = NT5C2, and peach = PNP).
RMSD value of the target protein.
| Protein | Minimum and Maximum (Å) | Difference in Distance (Å) |
|---|---|---|
| Xanthine oxidase (XO) | 0.48–2.30 | 1.82 |
| Adenine deaminase (ADA) | 0.45–2.00 | 1.55 |
| Guanine deaminase (GDA) | 0.48–2.35 | 1.87 |
| Purine nucleoside phosphorylase (PNP) | 0.48–2.25 | 1.77 |
| 5-Nucleotidase II (NT5C2) | 0.70–4.50 | 3.80 |
Binding energy of 13 compounds, resulting from ensemble docking using 10 conformations.
| Name | Binding Energy (kcal/mol) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| XO | ADA | GDA | PNP | NT5C2-1497 | NT5C2-1498 | |
| Diallyl thiosulfinate (Allicin) | −4.74 ± 0.52 | −4.43 ± 0.38 | −4.46 ± 0.15 | −4.28 ± 0.23 | −3.94 ± 0.24 | −3.66 ± 0.18 |
| Alliin | −4.15 ± 0.38 | −4.72 ± 0.47 | −4.43 ± 0.24 | −4.81 ± 0.26 | −3.61 ± 0.36 | −3.60 ± 0.47 |
| −4.04 ± 0.39 | −4.51 ± 0.29 | −4.12 ± 0.16 | −4.54 ± 0.20 | −3.72 ± 0.20 | −3.54 ± 0.27 | |
| Diallyl disulfide | −2.80 ± 0.11 | −3.19 ± 0.33 | −3.39 ± 0.13 | −2.94 ± 0.22 | −3.27 ± 0.20 | −3.05 ± 0.06 |
| −2.99 ± 0.42 | −4.10 ± 0. 48 | −2.94 ± 0.62 | −2.30 ± 0.57 | −3.47 ± 0.27 | −3.76 ± 0.72 | |
| N-acetyl- | −3.85 ± 0.23 | −3.56 ± 0. 34 | −3.80 ± 0.41 | −4.36 ± 0.33 | −4.36 ± 0.28 | −4.25 ± 0.31 |
| ( | −4.91 ± 0.12 | −5.32 ± 0. 24 | −4.94 ± 0.22 | −5.16 ± 0.28 | −4.58 ± 0.26 | −4.48 ± 0.28 |
| Pyridoxal | −5.01 ± 0.53 | −5.12 ± 0. 51 | −4.90 ± 0.27 | −4.71 ± 0.15 | −4.36 ± 0.26 | −4.64 ± 0.16 |
| Pyridoxamine | −5.26 ± 0.24 | −6.78 ± 0. 29 | −5.53 ± 0.29 | −6.06 ± 0.15 | −4.66 ± 0.30 | −4.68 ± 0.41 |
| DL-Carnitine | −2.39 ± 0.23 | −3.17 ± 0.30 | −2.52 ± 0.33 | −2.65 ± 0.30 | −3.44 ± 0.21 | −3.48 ± 0.44 |
| 4-Guanidinobutyric acid | −4.65 ± 0.43 | −3.60 ± 0.52 | −3.66 ± 0.21 | −4.58 ± 0.36 | −4.79 ± 0.47 | −4.17 ± 0.49 |
| D-Glucosamine | −5.23 ± 0.34 | −6.03 ± 0.39 | −5.27 ± 0.27 | −5.83 ± 0.23 | −4.03 ± 0.53 | −4.67 ± 0.35 |
| 5-hydroxymethyl-2-furaldehyde | −3.56 ± 0.29 | −3.70 ± 0.26 | −3.83 ± 0.20 | −3.92 ± 0.19 | −3.72 ± 0.23 | −3.34 ± 0.21 |
| Allopurinol (commercial) | −4.82 ± 0.25 | |||||
| −4.92 ± 0.36 | ||||||
| −4.72 ± 0.38 | ||||||
| Erythro-9-(2-hydroxy-3-nonyl)adenine [EHNA] (commercial) | −4.73 ± 0.42 | |||||
| −4.52 ± 0.58 | ||||||
| Azepinomycin (commercial) | −4.86 ± 0.28 | |||||
| −5.27 ± 0.16 | ||||||
| Ulodesine (commercial) | −6.03 ± 0.68 | |||||
| Guanosine (substrate) | −5.78 ± 0.67 | |||||
| Inosine (substrate) | −4.84 ± 0.40 | |||||
| Xanthosine (substrate) | −5.63 ± 0.55 | |||||
| Fludarabine (commercial) | −4.20 ± 0.52 | −4.04 ± 0.49 | ||||
| −4.18 ± 0.37 | −4.67 ± 0.33 | |||||
| −3.44 ± 0.36 | −4.67 ± 1,13 | |||||
| −4.73 ± 0.47 | −4.73 ± 0.80 | |||||
| −4.66 ± 0.51 | −4.63 ± 0.45 | |||||
Figure 53D and 2D visualization of the early conformational (a1,b1,c1) and late conformational ligand–receptor complexes (a2,b2,c2).
Physicochemical Parameters and ADMET Test and Commercial Ligands.
| Ligand | Physicochemical Parameters | ADMET Parameters | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MW a | LogP b (<5) | HBD c (<5) | HBA d (<10) | Bioavaibility (Score) | Human Intestinal Absorption (HIA) | AMES Mutagenesis | Carciogenicity | LD50 (mg/kg) (Predicted Toxicity Class) | |
| Allopurinol | 136.11 | −0.19 | 2 | 4 | GB (0.55) | HIA (+) | AMES (−) | NC | 1000 (IV) |
| Ulodesine | 264.28 | −0.80 | 4 | 6 | GB (0.55) | HIA (+) | AMES (−) | NC | 1000 (IV) |
| Erythro-9-(2-Hydroxy-3-nonyl)adenin [EHNA] | 277.37 | 2.30 | 3 | 5 | GB (0.55) | HIA (+) | AMES (−) | NC | 450 (IV) |
| Azepinomycin | 168.16 | −1.12 | 4 | 5 | GB (0.55) | HIA (+) | AMES (−) | NC | 2032 (V) |
| Fludarabine | 285.24 | −2.84 | 4 | 9 | GB (0.55) | HIA (+) | AMES (−) | NC | 13 (II) |
| Alliin | 177.22 | −0.67 | 2 | 3 | GB (0.55) | HIA (+) | AMES (−) | NC | 8000 (VI) |
| N-Acetyl-S-Allyl-L-Cysteine | 203.26 | 0.49 | 2 | 3 | GB (0.56) | HIA (+) | AMES (−) | NC | 4000 (V) |
| (E)-Ajoene | 234.41 | 3.00 | 0 | 3 | GB (0.55) | HIA (+) | AMES (−) | NC | 1600 (IV) |
| Pyridoxal | 167.16 | 0.40 | 2 | 13 | GB (0.55) | HIA (+) | AMES (−) | NC | 1120 (IV) |
| Pyridoxamine | 168.20 | 0.05 | 3 | 4 | GB (0.55) | HIA (+) | AMES (−) | NC | 5100 (VI) |
| 4-Guanidinobutyric acid | 145.16 | −0.88 | 3 | 2 | GB (0.55) | HIA (+) | AMES (−) | NC | 12,680 (VI) |
| D-Glucosamine | 179.17 | −2.55 | 5 | 19 | GB (0.55) | HIA (+) | AMES (−) | NC | 1000 (IV) |
Information: a = molecular weight, b = octanol water partition coefficient, c = hydrogen bond donor, d = hydrogen acceptor donor, GB = good bioavailability, NGB = not good bioavailability, NC = noncarcinogenicity.