Rational Design of α-Helical Antimicrobial Peptides with Enhanced Activities and Specificity/Therapeutic Index
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the present study, the 26-residue peptide sequence Ac-KWKSFLKTFKSAVKTVLHTALKAISS-amide (V681) was utilized as the framework to study the effects of peptide hydrophobicity/hydrophilicity, amphipathicity, and helicity (induced by single amino acid substitutions in the center of the polar and nonpolar faces of the amphipathic helix) on biological activities. The peptide analogs were also studied by temperature profiling in reversed-phase high performance liquid chromatography, from 5 to 80 degrees C, to evaluate the self-associating ability of the molecules in solution, another important parameter in understanding peptide antimicrobial and hemolytic activities. A higher ability to self-associate in solution was correlated with weaker antimicrobial activity and stronger hemolytic activity of the peptides. Biological studies showed that strong hemolytic activity of the peptides generally correlated with high hydrophobicity, high amphipathicity, and high helicity. In most cases, the D-amino acid substituted peptides possessed an enhanced average antimicrobial activity compared with L-diastereomers. The therapeutic index of V681 was improved 90- and 23-fold against Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria, respectively. By simply replacing the central hydrophobic or hydrophilic amino acid residue on the nonpolar or the polar face of these amphipathic derivatives of V681 with a series of selected D-/L-amino acids, we demonstrated that this method has excellent potential for the rational design of antimicrobial peptides with enhanced activities.
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) | 0.000 | 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".