ArticleEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2011
Comparative analysis of viperidae venoms antibacterial profile: a short communication for proteomics.
Article in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Screening the antimicrobial properties of snake venoms: an iterative fractionation approach.Access microbiology · 2026Article
- Antibacterial Activity of Venom from the Puff Adder (International journal of microbiology · 2023Article
- Screening Snake Venoms for Toxicity toToxins · 2020Article
- Antimicrobial Activity of Protein Fraction fromMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Article
- Review
- Viperatoxin-II: A novel viper venom protein as an effective bactericidal agent.FEBS open bio · 2015Article
- Evaluation of an antimicrobial L-amino acid oxidase and peptide derivatives from Bothropoides mattogrosensis pitviper venom.PloS one · 2012Article
- eCAM: Integrative Genomics and Fecundity.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bacterial infections involving multidrug-resistant strains are one of the ten leading causes of death and an important health problem in need for new antibacterial sources and agents. Herein, we tested and compared four snake venoms (Agkistrodon rhodostoma, Bothrops jararaca, B. atrox and Lachesis muta) against 10 Gram-positive and Gram-negative drug-resistant clinical bacteria strains to identify them as new sources of potential antibacterial molecules. Our data revealed that, as efficient as some antibiotics currently on the market (minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) = 1-32 μg mL(-1)), A. rhodostoma and B. atrox venoms were active against Staphylococcus epidermidis and Enterococcus faecalis (MIC = 4.5 μg mL(-1)), while B. jararaca inhibited S. aureus growth (MIC = 13 μg ml(-1)). As genomic and proteomic technologies are improving and developing rapidly, our results suggested that A. rhodostoma, B. atrox and B. jararaca venoms and glands are feasible sources for searching antimicrobial prototypes for future design new antibiotics against drug-resistant clinical bacteria. They also point to an additional perspective to fully identify the pharmacological potential of these venoms by using different techniques.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.