Enhanced Gram-Negative Membrane Disruption and In Vivo Efficacy via Lysine-Arginine Enrichment of Opis16a
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide Infections complicate burn wound care, especially with the rise of antimicrobial resistance. Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) offer the potential for advancing wound care by combating persistent infections. Opis16a, a scorpion venom-derived AMP, exhibits potent antibacterial activity by targeting Gram-negative membranes, causing rapid membrane disruption and bacterial cell death. Here, four novel Opis16a analogues were developed with improved membrane targeting and antibacterial efficacy. One analogue shows particular promise for topical application in Gram-negative burn wound infections. Enhanced peptide–lipid hydrogen bonding increases conformational stability, membrane insertion, and permeabilization rates. Substituting lysine residues in the C-terminal with arginine leads to the most consistent improvement in activity, selectivity for pathogen over HaCat cells, and stability in serum. In an in vivo Galleria mellonella burn wound model, a 5 mg/kg topical dose provides better protection than Opis16a against Enterobacter cloacae NICD 16103. These findings highlight the potential of optimized bactericidal AMPs to improve burn wound care.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".