Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31483516›Full record

ArticleDrug development research2020

Novel antimicrobial peptide discovery using machine learning and biophysical selection of minimal bacteriocin domains.

Francisco R Fields, Stefan D Freed, Katelyn E Carothers, Md Nafiz Hamid, Daniel E Hammers, Jessica N Ross, Veronica R Kalwajtys, Alejandro J Gonzalez, Andrew D Hildreth, Iddo Friedberg and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Drug development research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 65 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Recent Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Discovery of New Antibacterial Agents.Advances and applications in bioinformatics and chemistry : AABC · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Evolutionary andCurrent research in microbial sciences · 2023
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Artificial Intelligence and Antibiotic Discovery.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Francisco R FieldsDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana.ORCID 0000-0002-9029-5150
Stefan D FreedDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana.
Katelyn E CarothersDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana.
Md Nafiz HamidDepartment of Veterinary Microbiology and Preventive Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa.
Daniel E HammersDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana.
Jessica N RossDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana.
Veronica R KalwajtysDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana.
Alejandro J GonzalezDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana.
Andrew D HildrethDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana.
Iddo FriedbergDepartment of Veterinary Microbiology and Preventive Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa.ORCID 0000-0002-1789-8000
Shaun W LeeDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana.
University of Notre Dame · USIowa State University · US

Funding

Design and Use of Novel BacteriocinsDP2OD008468 · OD · UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME · PI LEE, SHAUN · 2011 to 2011
$2.3M
NIH HHS DP2 OD008468
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bacteriocins, the ribosomally produced antimicrobial peptides of bacteria, represent an untapped source of promising antibiotic alternatives. However, bacteriocins display diverse mechanisms of action, a narrow spectrum of activity, and inherent challenges in natural product isolation making in vitro verification of putative bacteriocins difficult. A subset of bacteriocins exert their antimicrobial effects through favorable biophysical interactions with the bacterial membrane mediated by the charge, hydrophobicity, and conformation of the peptide. We have developed a pipeline for bacteriocin-derived compound design and testing that combines sequence-free prediction of bacteriocins using machine learning and a simple biophysical trait filter to generate 20 amino acid peptides that can be synthesized and evaluated for activity. We generated 28,895 total 20-mer candidate peptides and scored them for charge, α-helicity, and hydrophobic moment. Of those, we selected 16 sequences for synthesis and evaluated their antimicrobial, cytotoxicity, and hemolytic activities. Peptides with the overall highest scores for our biophysical parameters exhibited significant antimicrobial activity against Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Our combined method incorporates machine learning and biophysical-based minimal region determination to create an original approach to swiftly discover bacteriocin candidates amenable to rapid synthesis and evaluation for therapeutic use.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsAntimicrobial Cationic PeptidesBacteriocinsComputational BiologyDrug DesignEscherichia coliHydrophobic and Hydrophilic InteractionsMachine LearningMicrobial Sensitivity TestsProtein DomainsProtein Structure, SecondaryPseudomonas aeruginosaStaphylococcus aureusStructure-Activity RelationshipAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntimicrobial Cationic PeptidesBacteriocinsantimicrobial peptidesbacteriocins

Identifiers

PMID31483516
PMCPMC9202646
OpenAlexW2971976902

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.