Synthesis, antimicrobial activity, and mechanistic studies of enterocin DD14, a leaderless two-peptide bacteriocin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bacteriocins are promising alternatives to antibiotics in the food, veterinary and medical sectors, but their study and use is often hampered by the low yields and high costs associated with their purification from naturally occurring bacteria. Chemical synthesis has emerged as a means to overcome this limitation and design more active variants. In this study, microwave-assisted solid-phase peptide synthesis was used to produce the leaderless two-peptide bacteriocin enterocin DD14 (EntDD14), composed of EntDD14A (44 amino acids) and EntDD14B (43 amino acids). The resulting synthetic peptides, syn -EntDD14A and syn-EntDD14B, were tested against Gram-positive bacteria including Listeria, Staphylococcus and Enterococcus strains. Both peptides were found to be necessary for optimal, but not synergistic, antibacterial activity and to act through a pore-forming mechanism. Both peptides exhibited moderate cytotoxicity against eukaryotic cells. • The EntDD14 two-peptide bacteriocin is composed by EntDD14A and EntDD14B. • Microwave-assisted solid-phase peptide synthesis of EntDD14A and EntDD14B peptides. • EntDD14A and EntDD14B peptides are necessary for optimal antibacterial, but not for synergistic, activity. • EntDD14A and EntDD14B peptides act through a pore-forming mechanism. • EntDD14A and EntDD14B peptides are moderately cytotoxic to eukaryotic cells.
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".