ArticleScientific reports2024
In-silico and in-vitro study of novel antimicrobial peptide AM1 from Aegle marmelos against drug-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Membrane vesicles associated antimicrobial peptides from PGPRPlant signaling & behavior · 2026Article
- Structural Modulation and Binding of HLA-DQ8 by Cysteine-to-Serine Mutated Insulin Peptide: Insights from Molecular Dynamics Simulations.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Macroalgal Bloom Biomass as a Source of Bioactive Compounds and Antimicrobial Peptides.Marine drugs · 2026Article
- Methicillin-ResistantAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- AI-Driven Antimicrobial Peptide Discovery: Mining and Generation.Accounts of chemical research · 2025Review
- OverallFrontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- Computational-aided drug design strategies for drug discovery and development against oral diseases.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Antimicrobial peptides have garnered increasing attention as potential alternatives due to their broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity and low propensity for developing resistance. This is for the first time; proteome sequences of Aegle marmelos were subjected to in-silico digestion and AMP prediction were performed using DBAASP server. After screening the peptides on the basis of different physiochemical property, peptide sequence GKEAATKAIKEWGQPKSKITH (AM1) shows the maximum binding affinity with - 10.2 Kcal/mol in comparison with the standard drug (Trimethoprim) with - 7.4 kcal/mol and - 6.8 Kcal/mol for DHFR and SaTrmK enzyme respectively. Molecular dynamics simulation performed for 300ns, it has been found that peptide was able to stabilize the protein more effectively, analysed by RMSD, RMSF, and other statistical analysis. Free binding energy for DHFR and SaTrmK interaction from MMPBSA analysis with peptide was found to be -47.69 and - 44.32 Kcal/mol and for Trimethoprim to be -13.85 Kcal/mol and - 11.67 Kcal/mol respectively. Further in-vitro study was performed against Methicillin Susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA), Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), Multi-Drug Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MDR-SA) strain, where MIC values found to be 2, 4, and 8.5 µg/ml lesser in comparison to trimethoprim which has higher MIC values 2.5, 5, and 9.5 µg/ml respectively. Thus, our study provides the insight for the further in-vivo study of the peptides against multi-drug resistant S. aureus.
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.