Article3 Biotech2019
Biological characterization of omw1 and omw2: antimicrobial peptides derived from omwaprin.
Article in 3 Biotech, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Antimicrobial Activity ofToxins · 2026Article
- Article
- Review
- Antimicrobials from Venomous Animals: An Overview.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Two cationic antimicrobial peptides (AMP) were designed based on the snake venom peptide, omwaprin, hypothesized to be shorter, cost effective and potent. Omw1 and omw2 demonstrated significant broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity against standard and clinical strains at a MIC ranging from 15.625 to 250 µg/ml for omw1 and from 31.3 to 500 µg/ml for omw2. Time-kill kinetics revealed that omw1 caused complete lysis of
Indexed as
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.