Structure–activity analysis of buforin II, a histone H2A-derived antimicrobial peptide: The proline hinge is responsible for the cell-penetrating ability of buforin II
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Buforin II is a 21-aa potent antimicrobial peptide that forms, in a hydrophobic medium, an amphipathic structure consisting of an N-terminal random coil region (residues 1-4), an extended helical region (residues 5-10), a hinge (residue 11), and a C-terminal regular alpha-helical region (residues 12-21). To elucidate the structural features of buforin II that are required for its potent antimicrobial activity, we synthesized a series of N- and C-terminally truncated or amino acid-substituted synthetic buforin II analogs and examined their antimicrobial activity and mechanism of action. Deletion of the N-terminal random coil region increased the antibacterial activity approximately 2-fold, but further N-terminal truncation yielded peptide analogs with progressively decreasing activity. Removal of four amino acids from the C-terminal end of buforin II resulted in a complete loss of antimicrobial activity. The substitution of leucine for the proline hinge decreased significantly the antimicrobial activity. Confocal fluorescence microscopic studies showed that buforin II analogs with a proline hinge penetrated the cell membrane without permeabilization and accumulated in the cytoplasm. However, removal of the proline hinge abrogated the ability of the peptide to enter cells, and buforin II analogs without a proline hinge localized on the cell surface, permeabilizing the cell membrane. In addition, the cell-penetrating efficiency of buforin II and its truncated analogs, which depended on the alpha-helical content of the peptides, correlated linearly with their antimicrobial potency. Our results demonstrate clearly that the proline hinge is responsible for the cell-penetrating ability of buforin II, and the cell-penetrating efficiency determines the antimicrobial potency of the peptide.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".