ArticleScientific reports2026
Integrated computational and experimental benchmarking of Bacillus phage endolysins reveals the relationship between peptidoglycan-fragment recognition descriptors and antibacterial performance.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Protein-based antibacterials such as bacteriophage endolysins offer a targeted therapeutic strategy against Gram-positive pathogens. However, prioritizing the most effective candidates from the large sequence diversity available remains a significant challenge. Here we present a standardized computational-experimental benchmarking framework that evaluates seven phage-derived endolysin variants (E1, E2, E3, E7, E10, E12, and E15) identified from Bacillus genomes. We combined molecular docking and residue-level interaction mapping against muramyl dipeptide (MDP), a minimal conserved peptidoglycan motif, with 1000-ns molecular dynamics simulations, MM/PBSA binding free-energy estimation, and matched functional inhibition assays against Staphylococcus aureus and Micrococcus luteus. Computational analyses revealed generally favorable MDP recognition across variants, albeit with notable differences in contact patterns and complex stability profiles. Experimental screening identified E2 as the most potent antibacterial agent against both species, while E7 and E1 performed strongly in selected computational metrics. Integrated analysis showed only modest correlations between computational descriptors of fragment recognition/stability and observed antibacterial performance. This study establishes a practical comparative benchmarking platform for endolysin candidate prioritization, nominates E2 and E7 as promising candidates for further development, and highlights E1 as a potential structural scaffold for rational engineering, while explicitly demonstrating both the utility and the current limitations of using minimal peptidoglycan fragments as proxies for full cell-wall recognition in lysin benchmarking.
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.