Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33835274›Full record

ArticleAMB Express2021

Mechanism of antimicrobial activity of honeybee (Apis mellifera) venom on Gram-negative bacteria: Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas spp.

Izlem Haktanir, Maria Masoura, Fani Th Mantzouridou, Konstantinos Gkatzionis

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AMB Express, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Antimicrobial Activity ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  9. Inhibitors of ATP Synthase as New Antibacterial Candidates.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Izlem HaktanirSchool of Chemical Engineering, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK. izlemhaktanir@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8917-0158
Maria MasouraSchool of Chemical Engineering, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
Fani Th MantzouridouLaboratory of Food Chemistry and Technology, Department of Chemistry, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 541 24, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Konstantinos GkatzionisSchool of Chemical Engineering, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK. k.gkatzionis@bham.ac.uk.
University of Birmingham · GBAristotle University of Thessaloniki · GR

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council MIBTP
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Honeybee venom (Apitoxin, BV), a secretion substance expelled from the venom gland of bees, has being reported as antimicrobial against various bacterial species; however, the mechanism of action remains uncharacterized. In this study, the antibacterial activity of BV was investigated on hygiene indicator Escherichia coli and the environmental pathogen and spoilage bacterial species, Pseudomonas putida and Pseudomonas fluorescens. An array of methods was combined to elucidate the mode of action of BV. Viability by culture on media was combined with assessing cell injury with flow cytometry analysis. ATP depletion was monitored as an indicator to metabolic activity of cells, by varying BV concentration (75, 225and 500 µg/mL), temperature (25 [Formula: see text] and 37 [Formula: see text]), and time of exposure (0 to 24 h). Venom presented moderate inhibitory effect on E. coli by viability assay, caused high membrane permeability and significant ATP loss where the effect was increased by increased concentration. The viability of P. putida was reduced to a greater extent than other tested bacteria at comparable venom concentrations and was dictated by exposure time. On the contrary, P. fluorescens appeared less affected by venom based on viability; however, flow cytometry and ATP analysis highlighted concentration- and time-dependent effect of venom. According to Transmission Electron Microscopy results, the deformation of the cell wall was evident for all species. This implies a common mechanism of action of the BV which is as follows: the cell wall destruction, change of membrane permeability, leakage of cell contents, inactivation of metabolic activity and finally cell death.

Indexed as

Antimicrobial mechanismApitoxinCell morphologyMembrane integrityMetabolic reduction

Identifiers

PMID33835274
PMCPMC8035396
OpenAlexW3130075644

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.