Solution Structure and Interaction of the Antimicrobial Polyphemusins with Lipid Membranes<sup>,</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The horseshoe crab cationic antimicrobial peptide polyphemusin I is highly active in vitro but not protective in mouse models of bacterial and LPS challenge, while a synthetic polyphemusin variant, PV5, was previously shown to be protective in vivo. In this study, we investigated the interaction of these peptides with lipid membranes in an effort to propose a mechanism of interaction. The solution structure of PV5 was determined by proton NMR in the absence and presence of dodecylphosphocholine (DPC) micelles. Like polyphemusin I, PV5 is a beta-hairpin but appeared less amphipathic in solution. Upon association with DPC micelles, PV5 underwent side chain rearrangements which resulted in an increased amphipathic conformation. Using fluorescence spectroscopy, both peptides were found to have limited affinity for neutral vesicles composed of phosphatidylcholine (PC). Incorporation of 25 mol % cholesterol or phosphatidylethanolamine into PC vesicles produced little change in the partitioning of either peptide. Incorporation of 25 mol % phosphatidylglycerol (PG) into PC vesicles, a simple prokaryotic model, resulted in a large increase in the affinity for both peptides, but the partition coefficient for PV5 was almost twice that of polyphemusin I. Differential scanning calorimetry studies supported the partitioning data and demonstrated that neither peptide interacted readily with neutral PC vesicles. Both peptides showed affinity for negatively charged membranes incorporating PG. The affinity of PV5 was much greater as the pretransition peak was absent at low peptide to lipid ratios (1:400) and the reduction in enthalpy of the main transition was greater than that produced by polyphemusin I. Both peptides decreased the lamellar to inverted hexagonal phase transition temperature of PE indicating the induction of negative curvature strain. These results, combined with previous findings that polyphemusin I promotes lipid flip-flop but does not induce significant vesicle leakage, ruled out the torroidal pore and carpet mechanisms of antimicrobial action for these polyphemusins.
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".