4.6 Article

Antimicrobial Activities of Bacteriocins E 50-52 and B 602 Against Antibiotic-Resistant Strains Involved in Nosocomial Infections

期刊

PROBIOTICS AND ANTIMICROBIAL PROTEINS
卷 1, 期 2, 页码 136-142

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12602-009-9027-6

关键词

Bacteriocin; MICs; Nosocomial infection; MRSA; ESBL; Antibacterial therapy

资金

  1. US State Department-ISTC [3445]
  2. US Department of Agriculture-CRIS [6612-32000-034-00]
  3. State Research Center for Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
  4. SRCAMB
  5. USDA CRIS
  6. US State Department ISTC grant [3445]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The antimicrobial spectra of previously published bacteriocin E 50-52 (39 a. a.; 3,932 Da; pI = 8.5) and bacteriocin B 602 (29 a. a.; 3,864 Da; pI = 7.2) were determined. Named peptides were related to class IIa (pediocin-like) bacteriocins. Minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of bacteriocins have been determined for bacterial isolates that were causative agents of nosocomial infections collected from Russian hospitals in 2003-2007, namely methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) (n = 10); Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 11); Citrobacter freundii (n = 8); Escherichia coli (n = 9); Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 10); Proteus spp. (n = 6); and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 10). The majority of these tested isolates have been shown to be multidrug resistant and carry genetic determinants of antimicrobial resistance that were detected using polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The MICs of bacteriocin B 602 ranged from <= 0.025-1.56 mu g/ml, and for bacteriocin E 50-52 from 0.05 to 6.25 mu g/ml for all of 64 bacterial clinical isolates tested. Interestingly, the bacteriocins studied demonstrate activity on both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. Bacteriocins E 50-52 and B 602 show good activity against nosocomial bacterial agents resistant to many classes of modern antibacterials used in clinical practice. These bacteriocins should be examined as an alternative in treating infections caused by such agents.

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

4.6
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