Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40539084›Full record

ArticleIn silico pharmacology2025

Virtual screening and molecular dynamic simulations of

Oluwafemi Adebayo Oyewole, Rahma Muhammad Adamu, Umar Saidu, Sekelwa Cosa, Mthokozisi B C Simelane, Md Atiar Rahman, Mohammed Auwal Ibrahim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in In silico pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Oluwafemi Adebayo OyewoleDepartment of Microbiology, Federal University of Technology, Minna, Nigeria.
Rahma Muhammad AdamuDepartment of Plant Biology, Federal University, Dutse, Nigeria.
Umar SaiduDepartment of Biochemistry, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria.
Sekelwa CosaDepartment of Biochemistry, Genetics and Microbiology, University of Pretoria, Hatfield Campus, Pretoria, South Africa.
Mthokozisi B C SimelaneDepartment of Biochemistry, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Md Atiar RahmanDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Chittagong, Chittagong, Bangladesh.
Mohammed Auwal IbrahimDepartment of Biochemistry, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dissimilatory sulfite reductase (DSR) plays a crucial role in the metabolism of sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB), which contribute to environmental hazards such as biocorrosion and sulfide pollution. The search for effective DSR inhibitors has been challenging due to the difficulty in culturing strict anaerobes. In this study, we employed molecular docking and 100 ns molecular dynamics (MD) simulations to screen 248 microbially-derived compounds for their potential as DSR inhibitors. Based on docking scores, nine hit compounds were identified, with dehydrocitreaglycon A exhibiting the highest binding affinity (-9.4 kcal/mol), followed by citreamicin theta A and etamycin. Hydrogen bond interaction analysis revealed that key active site residues, including Arg83, Arg101, and Lys215, played significant roles in ligand binding. MD simulations revealed varying stability among the DSR-compound complexes, with arisugacin A demonstrating the highest stability and minimal fluctuations, while antimycin A1 and peniciadametizine A showed the highest instability. The principal component analysis (PCA) indicated greater conformational flexibility in complexes with antimycin A1, etamycin, citreamicin theta A, and terretonin G. Binding free energy calculations confirmed that dehydrocitreaglycon A (-112.13 kJ/mol) and strobilurin (-107.66 kJ/mol) had the most favorable interactions with DSR. Furthermore, an in silico environmental toxicity assessment indicated that some compounds, such as salmochelin sx, posed higher toxicity risks, whereas others, like dehydrocitreaglycon A, showed lower environmental impact. Overall, our findings highlight strobilurin, arisugacin A, and dehydrocitreaglycon A as promising DSR inhibitors, warranting further investigation for potential applications in SRB control. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40203-025-00367-9.

Indexed as

Desulfovibrio vulgarisDSrEnvironmental toxicityMolecular dockingMolecular dynamic simulationsSRB

Identifiers

PMID40539084
PMCPMC12174035

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.