4.4 Article Proceedings Paper

In vitro antimicrobial activity of alpha-melanocyte stimulating hormone against major human pathogen Staphylococcus aureus

期刊

PEPTIDES
卷 30, 期 9, 页码 1627-1635

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.peptides.2009.06.020

关键词

alpha-MSH; Staphylococcus aureus; Antimicrobial peptides; Mechanisms of action; Biofilm

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Alpha-melanocyte stimulating hormone (alpha-MSH) is an endogenous anti-inflammatory peptide reported to possess antimicrobial properties, however their role as antibacterial peptides is yet to be established. In the present study, we examined in vitro antibacterial activity of alpha-MSH against S. aureus strain ISP479C and several methicillin-sensitive (MSSA) and methicillin-resistant (MRSA) S. aureus strains. Antibacterial activity was examined by varying several parameters, viz., bacterial cell densities, growth phase, pH, salt concentration, and temperature. Antibacterial activity was also examined in complex biomatrices of rat whole blood, plasma and serum as well as in biofilm form of bacteria. Our results showed that alpha-MSH possessed significant and rapid antibacterial activity against all the studied strains including MRSA (84% strains were killed on exposure to 12 mu M of alpha-MSH for 2 h). pH change from 7.4 to 4 increased alpha-MSH staphylocidal activity against ISP479C by 21%. Antibacterial activity of alpha-MSH was dependent on bacterial cell density and independent of growth phase. Moreover, antimicrobial activity was retained when alpha-MSH was placed into whole blood, plasma, and serum. Most importantly, a-MSH exhibited antibacterial activity against staphylococcal biofilms. Multiple membrane permeabilization assays suggested that membrane damage was, at least in part, a major mechanism of staphylocidal activity of alpha-MSH. Collectively the above findings suggest that alpha-MSH could be a promising candidate of a novel class of antimicrobial agents. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据