DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Antimicrobial Peptides (AMPs) with Dual Mechanisms: Membrane Disruption and Apoptosis

  • Lee, Juneyoung (School of Life Sciences, BK 21 Plus KNU Creative BioResearch Group, College of Natural Sciences, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Lee, Dong Gun (School of Life Sciences, BK 21 Plus KNU Creative BioResearch Group, College of Natural Sciences, Kyungpook National University)
  • Received : 2014.11.21
  • Accepted : 2014.12.19
  • Published : 2015.06.28

Abstract

Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) are one of the critical components in host innate immune responses to imbalanced and invading microbial pathogens. Although the antimicrobial activity and mechanism of action have been thoroughly investigated for decades, the exact biological properties of AMPs are still elusive. Most AMPs generally exert the antimicrobial effect by targeting the microbial membrane, such as barrel stave, toroidal, and carpet mechanisms. Thus, the mode of action in model membranes and the discrimination of AMPs to discrepant lipid compositions between mammalian cells and microbial pathogens (cell selectivity) have been studied intensively. However, the latest reports suggest that not only AMPs recently isolated but also well-known membrane-disruptive AMPs play a role in intracellular killing, such as apoptosis induction. In this mini-review, we will review some representative AMPs and their antimicrobial mechanisms and provide new insights into the dual mechanism of AMPs.

Keywords

Introduction

Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) are multifunctional molecules produced by not only specific cells but also many tissues of animals, plants, and invertebrates. They consist of diverse amino acids and are generally characterized by their size, sequence, net charge, structure, hydrophobicity, and amphipathicity [4]. Briefly, AMPs have approximately 12 to 50 amino acids and secondary structures like α-helix, β-sheet, or relaxed coils. Cationic antimicrobial peptides (CAPs) possess abundant positively charged amino acids, such as arginine (R) and lysine (K). The cationicity is specifically involved in the antibacterial activity, because the attraction between CAPs and the negatively charged head group of some phospholipids in the bacterial outer membrane, such as phosphatidylglycerol (PG) and cardiolipin, or lipopolysaccharide (LPS), and teichoic acid, is the first step for exerting antibacterial activity, followed by the interaction, insertion, and the membrane perturbation [46]. The hydrophobicity, relating to specific hydrophobic amino acids like tryptophan (W) or phenylalanine (F), is another significant factor, in terms of the affinity of water-soluble AMPs with target membrane lipid bilayer [4], which results in the antimicrobial effect. The hydrophobic region, such as hydrophobic terminus or hydrophobic amino acids, is also related to the self-association, forming α-helical bundles of AMPs [47]. It can additionally contribute to the toxicity of AMPs towards host cells. Therefore, designing cell-selective potent analogue peptides with reduced toxicity is a significant issue in peptide engineering study [23]. Owing to their unique properties, AMPs can be regarded as a novel pharmaceutical candidate for treating the diseases caused by pathogenic bacterial and fungal species, antibiotic-resistant microbial species, and even cancers.

 

AMPs Possessing Membrane-Active Mechanism

As is well known, AMPs exert their activity on microbial membrane or intracellular compartments. Specifically, membrane-disruptive peptides have been focused on thoroughly because of their direct potent activity against microbial plasma membranes. In the following subsections, we briefly review some key membrane-active AMPs (Table 1).

Table 1.AMPs and their antimicrobial mechanisms.

Defensins and Cathelicidins

In mammals, the epithelium of the intestine, respiratory tract, or skin is the first line of defense regarding barrier function and homeostasis because it directly adjoins an external environment [11]. Therefore, antimicrobial proteins derived from epithelial cells (ECs) are thoroughly investigated in the epithelial cell defense system. Defensins are the most well-established AMPs, consisting of 30-40 amino acids containing six cysteine residues [12,31]. They consist of two major groups, α-defensins and β-defensins.

α-Defensins are highly expressed in the small intestine. HD5 (DEFA5) and HD6 (DEFA6) peptides in humans are representative α-defensins [39]. Cryptdins are murine α-defensins [39]. α-Defensins are small peptides containing conserved amphipathic structures with positively charged/ hydrophobic residues [52]. This structural feature allows these peptides to bind with negatively charged cell surfaces of invading pathogens and to be inserted into the membrane [52].

β-Defensins are secreted from the epithelium of the skin (keratinocytes), respiratory tract (respiratory ECs), and large intestine (mainly enterocytes) [11]. This group of AMPs also exerts antimicrobial activity through selective microbial membrane permeabilization [45]. Cathelicidins (e.g., LL37 in humans and CRAMP in mice) are abundant in resident mast cells of the skin and also exist in ECs of the lung, urinary tract, and large intestine [2]. They are generally cationic α-helical peptides and these properties contribute to the binding affinity between cathelicidins and negatively charged phospholipids of bacteria [2].

Paneth cells are specialized secretory cells residing at the base of small intestinal crypts [41]. For intestinal homeostasis, they produce the antimicrobial proteins against enteric pathogens, such as α-defensins (cryptdins in mice), cryptdinrelated sequence (CRS) peptide, regenerating islet-derived protein (Reg) family of C-type lectins, and lysozymes [5,7,38]. HIP/PAP, hepatointestinal pancreatic/pancreatitis-associated protein (Reg3α) in humans and Reg 3β and Reg3γ in mice are representatives of the Reg family [38]. They have carbohydrate recognition domains selectively recognizing peptidoglycan of the gram-positive bacterial cell wall [30]. They are not membrane-disruptive AMPs. However, they play critical roles by interacting with the cell surface of bacteria.

Melittin

Melittin is the most distinguished lytic peptide, which is the main component of bee venom (40-50%) isolated from honey bee Apis mellifera [13]. This α-helical peptide is hydrophobic and possesses a high positive net charge of +6 [9]. It is generally used for membrane studies as a control peptide, as it exhibits definite disruption of the lipid membrane. Briefly, melittin binds to lipid membranes and forms a α-helical structure with both parallel and perpendicular positions. The perpendicular position is thought to be involved in pore formation [14,16,28,33,49,50]. Characteristically, melittin as a monomer, over 1 μg/ml, can bind to membrane lipids of erythrocytes, resulting in hemoglobin release within a few seconds [15]. Therefore, the design of analogs with lower cytotoxicity is important in melittin studies. Many studies focused on the leucine zipper motif contributing to the toxicity towards mammalian cells and simultaneous nonselective activity [40,53].

Cecropin

Cecropins were the first insect AMPs isolated from a giant silk moth, Hyalophora cecropia [17]. This peptide is cationic and adopts α-helical structures in the hydrophobic condition. Cecropins display a broad spectrum of antibacterial activity against gram-negative and gram-positive bacterial strains, and originate from the amidated C-terminus conferring to the interaction between membranes and these peptides [32,37]. Christensen et al. [8] demonstrated in detail that cecropins interacted with the lipid bilayer with electrostatic adsorption, followed by the insertion of the hydrophobic C-terminus in contrast with residual amphipathic helix in the interface. Moreover, cecropin showed channel formation in membranes in a voltage-dependent manner [8]. In mammals, cecropin P1 derived from the porcine small intestine has similarity in amino acids with insect cecropins [27]. Cecropins are also used as a reference peptide, like melittin, in membrane studies and antimicrobial mechanism studies of peptides and proteins. As is well-documented, cecropin A/melittin (CAME) hybrid peptides are established analog AMPs showing advanced antimicrobial effects [3,36].

Magainin

In 1987, Zasloff [51] designated the magainin peptides (magainin 1 and magainin 2), which originated from the skin of Xenopus laevis, an African clawed frog [51]. Interestingly, he suggested these AMPs could be expressed in not only eosinophilic and granule-laden intestinal cells, like mammalian Paneth cells, of Xenopus small intestine, but also the skin [43]. This site specificity suggested that magainins play a conserved role in the host defense system in both mammalians and non-mammalian vertebrates [43,51]. These two 23 mer peptides have an α-helical structure and a net positive charge of +4 [51]. They also showed remarkable antibiotic activity against a broad spectrum of bacteria, fungi, and protozoa [51]. Magainins have been thoroughly investigated regarding their biological properties and their notable features. They show high cell selectivity between pathogens and mammalian cells at the concentrations exhibiting antimicrobial activities, which allowed them to be employed as a template for the design of novel analog peptides [6,35,51]. In terms of the mechanism of action, magainins bind to acidic lipid compositions through electrostatic interactions and permeabilize the cell plasma membrane by forming pores [34,35]. The analog of cecropin A/magainin 2 (CAMA) hybrid peptide, an antibacterial peptide [48], is still being investigated for its clinical potential in microbial diseases in humans [44].

 

AMPs Possessing Apoptosis-Inducing Mechanism

In this part, we introduce some AMPs containing the apoptosis-inducing mechanism. Additionally, the established membrane-active AMPs showing a dual mechanism are reviewed (Table 1).

Coprisin

Coprisin (VTCDVLSFEAKGIAVNHSACALHCIALRKK GGSCQNGVCVCRN-NH2) is a defensin-like 43 mer peptide containing three disulfide bonds (positions: 3-34, 20-39, and 24-41), which was isolated from the dung beetle, Copris tripartitus, in 2009 [19]. Coprisin exhibited broad-spectrum antifungal activities against various fungal pathogens, such as Aspergillus and Candida species, without any cytotoxicity towards human erythrocytes [26]. Interestingly, several membrane studies, such as 1,6-diphenyl-1,3,5-hexatriene (DPH) fluorescence analysis, calcein leakage measurement from large unilamellar vesicles (LUVs), and rhodamine-conjugated single giant unilamellar vesicle (GUV) analysis, suggested that coprisin did not disrupt both the cell plasma membrane of Candida albicans and fungal model membranes [26]. Notably, in a rhodamine-conjugated single GUV, which is consisted of phosphatidylchoine (PC)/phosphatidylethanolamine (PE)/phosphatidylinositol (PI)/ergosterol (5:4:1:2 (w/w/w/w)), the absence of membrane-active action was well visualized [26]. Therefore, it was hypothesized that coprisin exerted its activity after the cell penetration. Based on the hypothesis, some apoptosis markers, such as phosphatidylserine (PS) exposure for early apoptosis, and DNA fragmentation for late apoptosis, were examined. The results showed that corpisin significantly induced apoptosis in C. albicans [26]. Furthermore, reactive oxygen species (ROS), specifically hydroxyl radicals (• OH), are suggested as key players in coprisin-induced apoptosis [26]. Coprisin additionally caused mitochondrial dysfunction and cytochrome c release/caspase activation as downstream events [26]. In addition, in terms of antibacterial activity, coprisin, which possesses an amphipathic α-helix (A19 to R28) and a electropositive surface formed by R28, K29, K 30, and R42, showed potent activity by targeting bacterial LPS [22]. However, the antifungal study of coprisin provided new insight regarding the mechanism of AMPs.

Papiliocin

In 2010, a novel cecropin-like AMP was isolated by Kim et al. [21] and named papiliocin. Papiliocin (RWKIFKKIE KVGRNVRDGIIKAGPAVAVVGQAATVVK-NH2) is a 37 mer peptide isolated from the swallowtail butterfly, Papilio xuthus [21]. It exhibited potent antimicrobial activities against both gram-positive and negative bacteria, and fungi, without cytotoxicity against human erythrocytesv [21]. The first mechanism study of paliliocin showed that papiliocin effectively disrupted the fungal plasma membrane of C. albicans [25]. In model membranes mimicking the outer leaflets of the C. albicans plasma membrane, papiliocin formed pores on the membrane within minutes [25]. The secondary structure, and antibacterial and anti-inflammatory properties of papiliocin were further investigated [20]. Kim et al. [20] suggested that papiliocin contained two α-helices (K3 to K21 and A25 to V36) with the hinge region [20].

The novel antimicrobial mechanism of papiliocin was proposed in succession [18]. The results showed that papiliocin caused apoptotic events, such as PS flip-flop, chromatin condensation, and DNA fragmentation in C. albicans [18]. It was also suggested that ROS accumulation and mitochondrial membrane damage could be the key in papiliocin-induced fungal apoptosis [18]. Unlike coprisin, papiliocin peptide showed a dual mechanism, membrane-active action, and apoptosis induction, specifically in fungal pathogens [18,25]. The exact demonstration of the coexistence between two discrepant mechanisms is still largely unknown. However, it will enable more effective clinical approaches in treating human fungal disease.

Melittin

As noted previously, melittin is widely known as a membrane-active AMP. However, a novel antimicrobial mechanism of melittin has been suggested [24]. In 2010, the potential of melittin in C. albicans was suggested for the first time by using some hallmarks of apoptosis, such as Annexin V, DAPI, and TUNEL staining [42]. However, the in-depth mechanism was still elusive. In 2014, the intracellular mechanism of melittin-induced apoptosis in C. albicans was further characterized [24]. Melittin caused ROS generation to play a pivotal role in the apoptosis induction, and specifically •OH is significantly involved [24]. The results also suggested the mitochondrial dysfunction and the caspase activation induced by melittin and further indicated the role of mitochondria by investigating Ca2+ homeostasis between the ER and mitochondria [24]. In the study, mitochondrial Ca2+ levels were highly increased, suggesting the mitochondrial perturbation or rupture by the decreased mitochondrial membrane potential (∆Ψm) [24]. In summary, it was suggested that melittin also possessed a dual antifungal mechanism.

Magainin 2

As discussed previously, magainin 2 is a pore-forming AMP [34,35]. It was recently proposed that magainin 2 caused bacterial cell death in Escherichia coli, like eukaryotic apoptosis [29]. Magainin 2 showed the apoptotic phenotype in a caspase-dependent manner, after membrane disruption [29]. Furthermore, RecA protein, which is essential for DNA repair in bacterial SOS responses [10], was suggested as a key player in magainin 2-induced bacterial cell death [29]. The result suggested that RecA was involved in the cleavage of LexA protein, which regulates SOS response in the damaged bacteria [1,29], and that RecA also acted as a caspase substrate in this apoptosis-like death [29]. It suggests that membrane-active peptides can successively exert the antimicrobial activity.

In conclusion, we have reviewed several membrane-active AMPs and comparatively novel AMPs showing apoptosis-inducing ability (Fig. 1). As noted, AMPs are still the most potent candidates as alternatives of conventional antibiotics. Ongoing studies, in terms of understanding the diverse mechanism of AMP, will contribute to the development of more potent AMPs without unexpected side effects.

Fig. 1.Dual mechanisms of AMPs.

References

  1. Adikesavan AK, Katsonis P, Marciano DC, Lua R, Herman C, Lichtarge O. 2011. Separation of recombination and SOS response in Escherichia coli RecA suggests LexA interaction sites. PLoS Genet. 7: e1002244. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1002244
  2. Bals R, Wilson JM. 2003. Cathelicidins – a family of multifunctional antimicrobial peptides. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 60: 711-720. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00018-003-2186-9
  3. Boman HG, Wade D, Boman IA, Wåhlin B, Merrifield RB. 1989. Antibacterial and antimalarial properties of peptides that are cecropin-melittin hybrids. FEBS Lett. 259: 103-106. https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-5793(89)81505-4
  4. Brogden KA. 2005. Antimicrobial peptides: pore formers or metabolic inhibitors in bacteria? Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 3: 238-250. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro1098
  5. Cash HL, Whitham CV, Behrendt CL, Hooper LV. 2006. Symbiotic bacteria direct expression of an intestinal bactericidal lectin. Science 313: 1126-1130. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1127119
  6. Chen HC, Brown JH, Morell JL, Huang CM. 1988. Synthetic magainin analogues with improved antimicrobial activity. FEBS Lett. 236: 462-466. https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-5793(88)80077-2
  7. Christa L, Carnot F, Simon MT, Levavasseur F, Stinnakre MG, Lasserre C, et al. 1996. HIP/PAP is an adhesive protein expressed in hepatocarcinoma, normal Paneth, and pancreatic cells. Am. J. Physiol. 271: G993-G1002.
  8. Christensen B, Fink J, Merrifield RB, Mauzerall D. 1988. Channel-forming properties of cecropins and related model compounds incorporated into planar lipid membranes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 85: 5072-5076. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.85.14.5072
  9. Dempsey CE. 1990. The actions of melittin on membranes. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1031: 143-161. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4157(90)90006-X
  10. Dwyer DJ, Camacho DM, Kohanski MA, Callura JM, Collins JJ. 2012. Antibiotic-induced bacterial cell death exhibits physiological and biochemical hallmarks of apoptosis. Mol. Cell 46: 561-572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2012.04.027
  11. Gallo RL, Hooper LV. 2012. Epithelial antimicrobial defence of the skin and intestine. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 12: 503-516. https://doi.org/10.1038/nri3228
  12. Ganz T. 2003. Defensins: antimicrobial peptides of innate immunity. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 3: 710-720. https://doi.org/10.1038/nri1180
  13. Habermann E. 1972. Bee and wasp venoms. Science 177: 314-322. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.177.4046.314
  14. He K, Ludtke SJ, Heller WT, Huang HW. 1996. Mechanism of alamethicin insertion into lipid bilayers. Biophys. J. 71: 2669-2679. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3495(96)79458-4
  15. Hider RC, Khader F, Tatham AS. 1983. Lytic activity of monomeric and oligomeric melittin. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 728: 206-214. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-2736(83)90473-X
  16. Hristova K, Dempsey CE, White SH. 2001. Structure, location, and lipid perturbations of melittin at the membrane interface. Biophys. J. 80: 801-811. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3495(01)76059-6
  17. Hultmark D, Steiner H, Rasmuson T, Boman HG. 1980. Insect immunity. Purification and properties of three inducible bactericidal proteins from hemolymph of immunized pupae of Hyalophora cecropia. Eur. J. Biochem. 106: 7-16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1432-1033.1980.tb05991.x
  18. Hwang B, Hwang JS, Lee J, Kim JK, Kim SR, Kim Y, et al. 2011. Induction of yeast apoptosis by an antimicrobial peptide, papiliocin. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 408: 89-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2011.03.125
  19. Hwang JS, Lee J, Kim YJ, Bang HS, Yun EY, Kim SR, et al. 2009. Isolation and characterization of a defensin-like peptide (coprisin) from the dung beetle, Copris tripartitus. Int. J. Pept. DOI: 10.1155/2009/136284.
  20. Kim JK, Lee E, Shin S, Jeong KW, Lee JY, Bae SY, et al. 2011. Structure and function of papiliocin with antimicrobial and anti-inflammatory activities isolated from the swallowtail butterfly, Papilio xuthus. J. Biol. Chem. 286: 41296-41311. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M111.269225
  21. Kim SR, Hong MY, Park SW, Choi KH, Yun EY, Goo TW, et al. 2010. Characterization and cDNA cloning of a cecropin-like antimicrobial peptide, papiliocin, from the swallowtail butterfly, Papilio xuthus. Mol. Cells 29: 419-423. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10059-010-0050-y
  22. Lee E, Kim JK, Shin S, Jeong KW, Shin A, Lee J, et al. 2013. Insight into the antimicrobial activities of coprisin isolated from the dung beetle, Copris tripartitus, revealed by structure-activity relationships. Biochim. Biophys. Acta Biomembr. 1828: 271-283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbamem.2012.10.028
  23. Lee J, Choi H, Cho J, Lee DG. 2011. Effects of positively charged arginine residues on membrane pore forming activity of Rev-NIS peptide in bacterial cells. Biochim. Biophys. Acta Biomembr. 1808: 2421-2427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbamem.2011.06.024
  24. Lee J, Lee DG. 2014. Melittin triggers in Candida albicans through the reactive oxygen species-mediated mitochondria/caspase-dependent pathway. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 355: 36-42. https://doi.org/10.1111/1574-6968.12450
  25. Lee J, Hwang JS, Hwang B, Kim JK, Kim SR, Kim Y, et al. 2010. Influence of the papiliocin peptide derived from Papilio xuthus on the perturbation of fungal cell membranes. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 311: 70-75. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6968.2010.02073.x
  26. Lee J, Hwang JS, Hwang IS, Cho J, Lee E, Kim Y, et al. 2012. Coprisin-induced antifungal effects in Candida albicans correlate with apoptotic mechanisms. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 52: 2302-2311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2012.03.012
  27. Lee JY, Boman A, Sun CX, Andersson M, Jörnvall H, Mutt V, et al. 1989. Antibacterial peptides from pig intestine: isolation of a mammalian cecropin. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 86: 9159-9162. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.86.23.9159
  28. Lee MT, Hung WC, Chen FY, Huang HW. 2008. Mechanism and kinetics of pore formation in membranes by water-soluble amphipathic peptides. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 105: 5087-5092. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0710625105
  29. Lee W, Lee DG. 2014. Magainin 2 induces bacterial cell death showing apoptotic properties. Curr. Microbiol. 69: 794-801. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00284-014-0657-x
  30. Lehotzky RE, Partch CL, Mukherjee S, Cash HL, Goldman WE, Gardner KH, et al. 2010. Molecular basis for peptidoglycan recognition by a bactericidal lectin. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 107: 7722-7727. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0909449107
  31. Lehrer RI. 2004. Primate defensins. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2: 727-738. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro976
  32. Li ZQ, Merrifield RB, Boman IA, Boman HG. 1988. Effects on electrophoretic mobility and antibacterial spectrum of removal of two residues from synthetic sarcotoxin IA and addition of the same residue to cecropin B. FEBS Lett. 231: 299-302. https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-5793(88)80837-8
  33. Ludtke SJ, He K, Heller WT, Harroun TA, Yang L, Huang HW. 1996. Membrane pores induced by magainin. Biochemistry 35: 13723-13728. https://doi.org/10.1021/bi9620621
  34. Matsuzaki K, Harada M, Funakoshi S, Fujii N, Miyajima K. 1991. Physicochemical determinants for the interactions of magainins 1 and 2 with acidic lipid bilayers. Biochim. Biophy. Acta 1063: 162-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-2736(91)90366-G
  35. Matsuzaki K, Sugishita K, Harada M, Fujii N, Miyajima K. 1997. Interactions of an antimicrobial peptide, magainin 2, with outer and inner membranes of gram-negative bacteria. Biochim. Biophy. Acta 1327: 119-130. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-2736(97)00051-5
  36. Merrifield RB, Juvvadi P, Andreu D, Ubach J, Boman A, Boman HG. 1995. Retro and retroenantio analogs of cecropin-melittin hybrids. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 92: 3449-3453. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.92.8.3449
  37. Nakajima Y, Qu XM, Natori S. 1987. Interaction between liposomes and sarcotoxin IA, a potent antibacterial protein of Sarcophaga peregrina (flesh fly). J. Biol. Chem. 262: 1665-1669.
  38. Ogawa H, Fukushima K, Naito H, Funayama Y, Unno M, Takahashi K, et al. 2003. Increased expression of HIP/PAP and regenerating gene III in human inflammatory bowel disease and a murine bacterial reconstitution model. Inflamm. Bowel Dis. 9: 162-170. https://doi.org/10.1097/00054725-200305000-00003
  39. Ouellette AJ. 2011. Paneth cell α-defensins in enteric innate immunity. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 68: 2215-2219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00018-011-0714-6
  40. Pandey BK, Ahmad A, Asthana N, Azmi S, Srivastava RM, Srivastava S, et al. 2010. Cell-selective lysis by novel analogues of melittin against human red blood cells and Escherichia coli. Biochemistry 49: 7920-7929. https://doi.org/10.1021/bi100729m
  41. Paneth J. 1887. Ueber die secernirenden Zellen des Dünndarm-Epithels. Arch. Mikrosk. Anat. 31: 113-191. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02955706
  42. Park C, Lee DG. 2010. Melittin induces apoptotic features in Candida albicans. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 394: 170-172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2010.02.138
  43. Reilly DS, Tomassini N, Bevins CL, Zasloff M. 1994. A Paneth cell analogue in Xenopus small intestine expresses antimicrobial peptide genes: conservation of an intestinal host-defense system. J. Histochem. Cytochem. 42: 697-704. https://doi.org/10.1177/42.6.8189032
  44. Ryu S, Choi SY, Acharya S, Chun YJ, Gurley C, Park Y, et al. 2011. Antimicrobial and anti-inflammatory effects of cecropin A(1-8)-magainin2(1-12) hybrid peptide analog p5 against Malassezia furfur infection in human keratinocytes. J. Invest. Dermatol. 131: 1677-1683. https://doi.org/10.1038/jid.2011.112
  45. Schmidt NW, Mishra A, Lai GH, Davis M, Sanders LK, Tran D, et al. 2011. Criterion for amino acid composition of defensins and antimicrobial peptides based on geometry of membrane destabilization. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 133: 6720-6727. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja200079a
  46. Scott MG, Yan H, Hancock RE. 1999. Biological properties of structurally related alpha-helical cationic antimicrobial peptides. Infect. Immun. 67: 2005-2009.
  47. Shai Y. 2002. Mode of action of membrane active antimicrobial peptides. Biopolymers 66: 236-249. https://doi.org/10.1002/bip.10260
  48. Shin SY, Lee MK, Kim KL, Hahm KS. 1997. Structure-antitumor and hemolytic activity relationships of synthetic peptides derived from cecropin A-magainin 2 and cecropin A-melittin hybrid peptides. J. Pept. Res. 50: 279-285. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3011.1997.tb01469.x
  49. Steiner H, Andreu D, Merrifield RB. 1988. Binding and action of cecropin and cecropin analogues: antibacterial peptides from insects. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 939: 260-266. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-2736(88)90069-7
  50. Yang L, Harroun TA, Weiss TM, Ding L, Huang HW. 2001. Barrel-stave model or toroidal model? A case study on melittin pores. Biophys. J. 81: 1475-1485. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3495(01)75802-X
  51. Zasloff M. 1987. Magainins, a class of antimicrobial peptides from Xenopus skin: isolation, characterization of two active forms, and partial cDNA sequence of a precursor. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 84: 5449-5453. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.84.15.5449
  52. Zasloff M. 2002. Antimicrobial peptides of multicellular organisms. Nature 415: 389-395. https://doi.org/10.1038/415389a
  53. Zhu WL, Song YM, Park Y, Park TH, Yang ST, Kim JI, et al. 2007. Substitution of the leucine zipper sequence in melittin with peptoid residues affects self-association, cell selectivity, and mode of action. Biochim. Biophys. Acta Biomembr. 1768: 1506-1517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbamem.2007.03.010

Cited by

  1. A Cactus‐Derived Toxin‐Like Cystine Knot Peptide with Selective Antimicrobial Activity vol.16, pp.7, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1002/cbic.201402704
  2. Antimicrobial Peptides from Fruits and Their Potential Use as Biotechnological Tools—A Review and Outlook vol.7, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2016.02136
  3. Imaging the antimicrobial mechanism(s) of cathelicidin-2 vol.6, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1038/srep32948
  4. Protein aggregation as an antibiotic design strategy vol.99, pp.5, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1111/mmi.13269
  5. Sarkosyl-Induced Helical Structure of an Antimicrobial Peptide GW-Q6 Plays an Essential Role in the Binding of Surface Receptor OprI in Pseudomonas aeruginosa vol.11, pp.10, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0164597
  6. NFAP2, a novel cysteine-rich anti-yeast protein from Neosartorya fischeri NRRL 181: isolation and characterization vol.6, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1186/s13568-016-0250-8
  7. pH Dependent Antimicrobial Peptides and Proteins, Their Mechanisms of Action and Potential as Therapeutic Agents vol.9, pp.4, 2016, https://doi.org/10.3390/ph9040067
  8. Antimicrobial Activity of the Scolopendrasin V Peptide Identified from the Centipede Scolopendra subspinipes mutilans vol.27, pp.1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.4014/jmb.1609.09057
  9. The anti-microbial peptide TP359 attenuates inflammation in human lung cells infected with Pseudomonas aeruginosa via TLR5 and MAPK pathways vol.12, pp.5, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176640
  10. The role of natural antimicrobial peptides during infection and chronic inflammation vol.111, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10482-017-0929-0
  11. Reactive oxygen species modulate itraconazole-induced apoptosis via mitochondrial disruption inCandida albicans vol.52, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1080/10715762.2017.1407412
  12. Understanding the antimicrobial properties/activity of an 11-residue Lys homopeptide by alanine and proline scan vol.50, pp.5, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00726-018-2542-6
  13. Identification of Peptides in Flowers of Sambucus nigra with Antimicrobial Activity against Aquaculture Pathogens vol.23, pp.5, 2015, https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules23051033
  14. Caerin1.1 Suppresses the Growth of Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Virus In Vitro via Direct Binding to the Virus vol.10, pp.9, 2015, https://doi.org/10.3390/v10090507
  15. LL-37 disrupts the Kaposi's sarcoma-associated herpesvirus envelope and inhibits infection in oral epithelial cells vol.158, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.antiviral.2018.07.025
  16. Evaluating the Bioactivity of a Novel Broad-Spectrum Antimicrobial Peptide Brevinin-1GHa from the Frog Skin Secretion of Hylarana guentheri and Its Analogues vol.10, pp.10, 2015, https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins10100413
  17. The cyclic peptide labaditin does not alter the outer membrane integrity of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium vol.9, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-38551-5
  18. Novel attacin from Hermetia illucens: cDNA cloning, characterization, and antibacterial properties vol.49, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1080/10826068.2018.1541807
  19. Bioevaluation of Ranatuerin-2Pb from the Frog Skin Secretion of Rana pipiens and its Truncated Analogues vol.9, pp.6, 2015, https://doi.org/10.3390/biom9060249
  20. Antibiotic Peptides vol.55, pp.4, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1134/s0022093019040021
  21. 흰점박이꽃무지 유래 항균 펩타이드 프로테티아마이신 2의 항염증활성 vol.29, pp.11, 2019, https://doi.org/10.5352/jls.2019.29.11.1218
  22. The cationic cell‐penetrating KT2 peptide promotes cell membrane defects and apoptosis with autophagy inhibition in human HCT 116 colon cancer cells vol.234, pp.12, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1002/jcp.28774
  23. An influential meal: host plant dependent transcriptional variation in the beet armyworm, Spodoptera exigua (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) vol.20, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-019-6081-7
  24. Cationic antimicrobial peptides: alternatives and/or adjuvants to antibiotics active against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and multidrug-resistant  Pseudomonas aeruginosa vol.19, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12866-019-1416-8
  25. Sources, Mechanism and Clinical Application of Antimicrobial Peptides vol.10, pp.8, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12677/acm.2020.108260
  26. Mini Review on Antimicrobial Peptides, Sources, Mechanism and Recent Applications vol.27, pp.1, 2020, https://doi.org/10.2174/0929866526666190822165812
  27. Antiviral Activities of Human Host Defense Peptides vol.27, pp.9, 2020, https://doi.org/10.2174/0929867326666190805151654
  28. Peptide Extracts from Native Lactic Acid Bacteria Generate Ghost Cells and Spheroplasts upon Interaction with Salmonella enterica , as Promising Food Antimicrobials vol.2020, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/6152356
  29. Expression and Roles of Antimicrobial Peptides in Innate Defense of Airway Mucosa: Potential Implication in Cystic Fibrosis vol.11, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.01198
  30. Antifungal peptides produced by actinomycetes and their biological activities against plant diseases vol.73, pp.5, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41429-020-0287-4
  31. Anticandidal activity of synthetic peptides: Mechanism of action revealed by scanning electron and fluorescence microscopies and synergism effect with nystatin vol.26, pp.6, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1002/psc.3249
  32. Characterization of the structure-function relationship of a novel salt-resistant antimicrobial peptide, RR12 vol.10, pp.40, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1039/d0ra04299d
  33. Antibacterial action of lactoferricin B like peptide against Escherichia coli: reactive oxygen species‐induced apoptosis‐like death vol.129, pp.2, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1111/jam.14632
  34. Nanocarrier‐Mediated Cytosolic Delivery of Biopharmaceuticals vol.30, pp.37, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.201910566
  35. Antimicrobial activity of synthetic Dq-3162, a 28-residue ponericin G-like dinoponeratoxin from the giant ant Dinoponera quadriceps venom, against carbapenem-resistant bacteria vol.187, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.toxicon.2020.08.015
  36. Interaction of synthetic antimicrobial peptides of the Hylin a1 family with models of eukaryotic structures: Zwitterionic membranes and DNA vol.24, pp.None, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrep.2020.100827
  37. Molecular Basis of the Anticancer and Antibacterial Properties of CecropinXJ Peptide: An In Silico Study vol.22, pp.2, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22020691
  38. Activity and Mechanism of Action of Antifungal Peptides from Microorganisms: A Review vol.26, pp.11, 2015, https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26113438
  39. Virtual Screening for Biomimetic Anti-Cancer Peptides from Cordyceps militaris Putative Pepsinized Peptidome and Validation on Colon Cancer Cell Line vol.26, pp.19, 2015, https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26195767
  40. Adjuvants: friends in vaccine formulations against infectious diseases vol.17, pp.10, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2021.1934354
  41. Bioactive cationic peptides as potential agents for breast cancer treatment vol.41, pp.12, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1042/bsr20211218c
  42. Antitumor Effects of Scorpion Peptide Smp43 through Mitochondrial Dysfunction and Membrane Disruption on Hepatocellular Carcinoma vol.84, pp.12, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jnatprod.1c00963