ArticleProbiotics and antimicrobial proteins2021
Characterization and Quantitative Determination of a Diverse Group of Bacillus subtilis subsp. subtilis NCIB 3610 Antibacterial Peptides.
Article in Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Administration of probiotics affectsFish and shellfish immunology reports · 2023Article
- Effect of fermentation on structural properties and antioxidant activity of wheat gluten byFrontiers in nutrition · 2023Article
- Complete genome sequencing and strain characterization of a novel marine Bacillus velezensis FTL7 with a potential broad inhibitory spectrum against foodborne pathogens.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2022Article
- Characterization of subtilosin gene in wild type Bacillus spp. and possible physiological role.Scientific reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Five antibacterial peptides produced by Bacillus subtilis NCIB 3610 were purified, quantified, characterized, and identified in the present study. Cell-free extracts were subjected to three purification protocols employing ammonium sulfate or organic solvent precipitation and their combination, followed by ion-exchange chromatography, solid-phase extraction, and preparative high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). The combined ammonium sulfate and organic solvent precipitation extraction protocol presented the best results for peptide purification. In the five fractions that presented antimicrobial activity, antibacterial peptides were quantified by the turbidometric method and by HPLC using nisin for external calibration, with the second providing more accurate results. All peptides were pH- and temperature-resistant and their sensitivity to proteases treatment indicated their proteinic nature. The five peptides were subjected to microwave-assisted acid hydrolysis (MAAH) and following derivatization were analyzed using norleucine as the internal standard, to determine their amino acid content. The identification of the isolated peptides using the UniProt and PubChem databases indicated that the four peptides correspond to UniProt entries of the bacteriocins Subtilosin-A (Q1W152) Subtilosin-SbOX (H6D9P4), Ericin B (Q93GH3), Subtilin (P10946), and the fifth to the non-ribosomal antibacterial lipopeptide surfactin (CID:443592). The amino acid content determination and computational analyses, applied in the present work on the antimicrobial peptides of B. subtilis, proved an efficient screening and quantification method of bacteriocins that could potentially be applied in other bacterial strains. The constructed phylogenetic trees heterogeneity observed across the five peptides investigated might be indicative of competitive advantage of the strain.
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.