ArticlePloS one2020
Analysis of mutations of defensin protein using accelerated molecular dynamics simulations.
Article in PloS one, 2020. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Selective α-Amylase Inhibition by Plant Defensins: Structural Determinants, Engineering Strategies, and Translational Prospects.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2026Review
- Strategies and opportunities for engineering antifungal peptides for therapeutic applications.Current opinion in biotechnology · 2023Review
- The γ-Core Motif Peptides of Plant AMPs as Novel Antimicrobials for Medicine and Agriculture.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Antimicrobial Peptides with Anti-International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Plant defensins possess diverse biological functions that include antifungal and antibacterial activities and α-amylase and trypsin inhibitory properties. Two mutations, G9R and V39R, were confirmed to increase the antifungal activity of Raphanus sativus antifungal protein 2 (RsAFP2). Accelerated Molecular Dynamics (aMD) were carried out to examine the conformational changes present in these RsAFP2 mutants, and its two closest homologs compared to the wild-type protein. Specifically, the root mean square fluctuation values for the eight cysteine amino acids involved in the four disulfide bonds were low in the V39R mutant compared to the wild-type. Additionally, analysis of the free energy change revealed that G9R and V39R mutations exert a neutral and stabilizing effect on RsAFP2 conformation, and this is supported by the observed lower total energy of mutants compared to the wild-type, suggesting that enhanced stability of the mutants. However, MD simulations to a longer time scale would aid in capturing more conformational state of the wild-type and mutants defensin protein. Furthermore, the aMD simulations on fungal mimic membranes with RsAFP2 and its mutants and homologs showed that the mutant proteins caused higher deformation and water diffusion than the native RsAFP2, especially the V39R mutant. The mutant variants seem to interact by specifically targeting the POPC and POPI lipids amongst others. This work highlights the stabilizing effect of mutations at the 9th and 39th positions of RsAFP2 and their increased membrane deformation activity.
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.