ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2022
An Efficient Evaluation System Accelerates α-Helical Antimicrobial Peptide Discovery and Its Application to Global Human Genome Mining.
Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2022. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- SGAC: a graph neural network framework for imbalanced and structure-aware AMP classification.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Harnessing Machine Learning Approaches for the Identification, Characterization, and Optimization of Novel Antimicrobial Peptides.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Cathelicidin AS-12W Derived from the Alligator sinensis and Its Antimicrobial Activity Against Drug-Resistant Gram-Negative Bacteria In Vitro and In Vivo.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2025Article
- Synergistic effects of oxidative and acid stress on bacterial membranes of Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus simulans.Communications biology · 2024Article
- Antimicrobial peptides designed by computational analysis of proteomes.Antonie van Leeuwenhoek · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs), as an important part of the innate immune system of an organism, is a kind of promising drug candidate for novel antibiotics due to their unique antibacterial mechanism. However, the discovery of novel AMPs is facing a great challenge due to the complexity of systematic experiments and the poor predictability of antimicrobial activity. Here, a novel and comprehensive screening system, the Multiple Descriptor Multiple Strategy (MultiDS), was proposed based on 59 physicochemical and structural parameters, three strategies, and four algorithms for the mining of α-helical AMPs. This approach was applied to mine the encrypted peptide antibiotics from the global human genome, including introns and exons. A library of approximately 70 billion peptides with 15-25 amino acid residues was screened by the MultiDS system and generated a list of peptides with the Multiple Descriptor Index (MD index) scores, which was the core part of the MultiDS system. Sixty peptides with top MD scores were chemically synthesized and experimentally tested their antimicrobial activity against 10 kinds of Gram-positive bacteria, Gram-negative bacteria (including drug-resistant pathogens). A total of fifty-nine out of 60 (98.3%) peptides exhibited antimicrobial activity (MIC ≤ 64 μg/mL), and 24 out of 60 (40%) peptides showed high activity (MIC ≤ 2 μg/mL), validating the MultiDS system was an effective and predictive screening tool with high hit rate and superior antimicrobial activity. For further investigation, AMPs S1, S2, and S3 with the highest MD scores were used to treat the skin infection mouse models
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.