|
|
||||||||
Vol. 55, Issue 1, 27-55, March 2003
Division of Infectious Diseases, Harbor-University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) Medical Center; St. John's Cardiovascular Research Center, Harbor-UCLA Research and Education Institute, Torrance, California; and UCLA School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California
Abstract
I. Introduction
II. Mechanisms of Antimicrobial Peptide Target Specificity and Selective Toxicity
A. Comparative Membrane Architecture and Energy
1. Membrane Composition, Hydrophobicity, and Charge.
2. Membrane Asymmetry.
3. Microbial Ligands for Antimicrobial Peptides.
4. Transmembrane Potential.
B. Antimicrobial Peptide Structure-Based Selective Toxicity
C. In Vivo Preferential Affinity for Microorganisms versus Mammalian Cells
D. Antimicrobial Peptide Localization to Restrict Exposure of Vulnerable Host Tissues
E. Themes in Target Affinity and Selective Toxicity of Antimicrobial Peptides
III. Mechanisms of Antimicrobial Peptide Action
A. Structural Determinants of Antimicrobial Peptide Activity
1. Conformation ().
2. Charge (Q).
3. Amphipathicity (A) and Hydrophobic Moment (MH).
4. Hydrophobicity (H).
5. Polar Angle ().
B. Common Themes in Structural Determinants of Antimicrobial Peptides
C. Initial Peptide Interactions with Membrane Targets
1. Electrostatic Interactions.
2. Receptor-Mediated Membrane Interactions.
D. Events Subsequent to Initial Membrane Binding
1. Threshold Concentration.
2. Conformational Phase Transition.
3. Self-Association and Multimerization.
4. The Barrel-Stave Mechanism.
5. The Toroid Pore or Wormhole Mechanism.
6. The Carpet Mechanism.
E. Mechanisms of Cell Death
1. Membrane Dysfunction.
2. Inhibition of Extracellular Biopolymer Synthesis.
3. Inhibition of Intracellular Functions.
F. Synergy among Antimicrobial Peptides
G. Themes in Mechanisms of Action of Antimicrobial Peptides
IV. Mechanisms of Antimicrobial Peptide Resistance
A. Constitutive and Inducible Resistance
B. Constitutive (Passive) Resistance
1. Inherent Mechanisms of Resistance to Antimicrobial Peptides.
2. Altered Membrane Energetics.
3. Electrostatic Shielding.
4. Niche-Specific Resistance.
C. Inducible (Adaptive) Resistance
1. Coordinate Microbial Responses to Antimicrobial Peptide Stress.
2. Adaptive Mechanisms of Resistance to Antimicrobial Peptides.
3. Proteases and Peptidases.
4. Extracellular Structural Modifications.
5. Resistance Modifications of the Cytoplasmic Membrane.
6. Efflux-Dependent Resistance Mechanisms.
7. Modification of Intracellular Targets.
V. Prospectus: Therapeutic Targets of Antimicrobial Peptides
A. Reconstitution or Potentiation of Conventional Antibiotic Efficacy
B. Unique and Specific Microbial Targets
C. Targeting Strategic Microbial Response Pathways
D. Engineering New Anti-Infectives Based on Peptide Structure and Function
VI. Summary
Acknowledgments
References
| |
Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Antimicrobial peptides have been isolated and characterized from tissues and organisms representing virtually every kingdom and phylum, ranging from prokaryotes to humans. Yet, recurrent structural and functional themes in mechanisms of action and resistance are observed among peptides of widely diverse source and composition. Biochemical distinctions among the peptides themselves, target versus host cells, and the microenvironments in which these counterparts convene, likely provide for varying degrees of selective toxicity among diverse antimicrobial peptide types. Moreover, many antimicrobial peptides employ sophisticated and dynamic mechanisms of action to effect rapid and potent activities consistent with their likely roles in antimicrobial host defense. In balance, successful microbial pathogens have evolved multifaceted and effective countermeasures to avoid exposure to and subvert mechanisms of antimicrobial peptides. A clearer recognition of these opposing themes will significantly advance our understanding of how antimicrobial peptides function in defense against infection. Furthermore, this understanding may provide new models and strategies for developing novel antimicrobial agents, that may also augment immunity, restore potency or amplify the mechanisms of conventional antibiotics, and minimize antimicrobial resistance mechanisms among pathogens. From these perspectives, the intention of this review is to illustrate the contemporary structural and functional themes among mechanisms of antimicrobial peptide action and resistance.
| |
I. Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Human subtlety will never devise
an invention more beautiful, more simple, or more direct than does
Nature
because in her inventions, nothing is
lacking
and nothing is superfluous...
Leonardo
da Vinci
Antimicrobial peptides represent ancient host defense effector molecules present in organisms across the evolutionary spectrum. Fundamental differences exist between microbial and mammalian cells that may represent targets for antimicrobial peptides. Among these, significant distinctions include membrane composition and architecture, energetics such as transmembrane potential and polarization, and structural features including sterols, lipopolysaccharide and peptidoglycan. Disparities such as these appear to translate to varying degrees of selective toxicity among distinct antimicrobial peptides, relating to peptide and target cell properties, as well as the biological settings in which the two interact.
Although hundreds of antimicrobial peptides have now been characterized as having widely diverse sequences, these peptides have been classified into relatively few conformational paradigms. Therefore, it may be argued that a high degree of degeneracy exists within the conformation code governing structure-activity relationships among antimicrobial peptides. Many of these molecules, within and beyond conformational classes, exhibit mechanisms of action that are highly complex and non-identical. Moreover, new evidence points to targets that lie interior to the cytoplasmic membrane as being important in antimicrobial mechanisms of these peptides. Thus, the assumption that antimicrobial peptides are uniform and indiscriminant membrane detergents is obsolete. Recognition of the sophisticated and thematic structure-activity relationships underlying distinct mechanisms of action among antimicrobial peptides will facilitate a more complete appreciation of their likely multiple roles in antimicrobial host defense.
Antimicrobial peptides have evolved as integral components of strategic and carefully regulated mechanisms of immunity to infection. However, microbial pathogens have not been passive to this evolutionary procession. Rather, prokaryotic and eukaryotic pathogens devote a considerable portion of their genomes to expressing complex and coordinately regulated countermeasures designed to subvert antimicrobial peptide targeting and mechanisms of action.
A clearer understanding of these parallel systems will advance two important, yet elusive goals. First, an awareness of the mechanisms employed by antimicrobial peptides will significantly improve our understanding of how these molecules act to defend against infection. Second, insights into these strategies will facilitate new opportunities and approaches to discover and develop pharmacologic agents that enhance or optimize immune mechanisms and suppress the ability of pathogens to subvert these mechanisms.
| |
II. Mechanisms of Antimicrobial Peptide Target Specificity and Selective Toxicity |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Polypeptides that exert antimicrobial activity have been isolated
from essentially every tissue in which they have been sought. This
intriguing observation has contributed to divergent interpretations regarding the potential functions of many of these peptides in antimicrobial host defense: peptides that may have little or no relevance in antimicrobial host defense can be demonstrated to inhibit
or kill microorganisms in defined or austere conditions in
vitro
versus
complementary peptides of varying structures, tissue
sources, antimicrobial mechanisms, potencies, and/or spectra function
in consort to provide optimal host defense against infection.
A pivotal consideration in this regard is the degree to which an antimicrobial peptide distinguishes between microbial and host cells in settings of potential toxicity. Evidence continues to mount in support of the concept that inherent structures or functions of microbial versus host cells contribute to selective antimicrobial discretion of some peptides. Alternatively, antimicrobial peptide access to potentially vulnerable host tissues may be limited by localization and/or or highly regulated expression. The following discussion highlights these themes as supported by recent studies.
A. Comparative Membrane Architecture and Energy
All biological membranes are in effect composed of a fluid mosaic of proteins and phospholipids. In some organisms, sterols and glycerides also contribute to the surface topology and biochemical architecture of biomembranes. Yet, fundamental differences exist between microbial and host membranes that represent potentially selective targets for antimicrobial peptides. Moreover, central to the potential pharmacologic application of antimicrobial peptides is the degree to which they differentiate, or may be engineered to differentiate, between microbial targets and normal host cells.
1. Membrane Composition, Hydrophobicity, and
Charge.
The elementary component of essentially all
biomembranes is the phospholipid bilayer. By definition, such bilayers
are amphipathic, having both hydrophobic and hydrophilic domains.
However, based on composition and influenced by cell energetics,
biomembranes of prokaryotic versus eukaryotic cells differ
significantly. For example, phosphatidylcholine
(PC1) and
phosphatidylethanolamine (PE) normally have no net charge. Moreover,
sphingomyelin (SM), a close analog of PC containing a palmitoyl
residue, is also neutrally charged. In many membrane systems, the
amounts of PC and SM are inversely related. Sterols such as cholesterol
and ergesterol, found in eukaryotic but rarely in prokaryotic
membranes, are also generally neutral. In contrast, hydroxylated
phospholipids phosphatidylglycerol (PG), cardiolipin (CL; effectively a
dimer of PG), and phosphatidylserine (PS), sustain a net negative
charge. From these perspectives, it follows that the net charge of a
biomembrane is based largely upon its phospholipid stoichiometry and
architecture (Fig. 1). Cell membranes composed predominantly of PG, CL, or PS tend to be highly
electronegative; such compositions are found in many bacterial
pathogens. On the contrary, bilayers enriched in the zwitterionic
phospholipids PE, PC, or SP
commonly found in mammalian cytoplasmic
membranes
are generally neutral in net charge. These characteristic
membrane charge properties may also be compounded by differences in
electrochemical gradients of prokaryotic versus eukaryotic cells (see
below). Sterols within membranes may further differentiate mammalian
and fungal cells from prokaryotes (Tytler et al., 1995
; see below) as
potential targets for antimicrobial peptides. Moreover, it is
intriguing to note that peptides with primarily antifungal activity,
such as many of those isolated from plants, tend to be relatively rich
in polar neutral amino acids, suggesting a unique structure-activity
relationship (Hancock and Chapple, 1999
).
|
2. Membrane Asymmetry.
The compositional and architectural
characteristics of prokaryotic and mammalian membranes are neither
static nor symmetric. Distinctions between microbial and mammalian
cells as targets for antimicrobial peptides include the configuration
of phospholipid bilayer components. Recent evidence indicates that the
distribution of phospholipids within cytoplasmic membranes is highly
asymmetric. For example, only 2% of the total PE content in bovine
erythrocytes is oriented toward the outer membrane leaflet
(Florin-Christensen et al., 2001
). Differences among asymmetric
distribution, compositional stoichiometry, and saturation of
phospholipid bilayers also significantly influence membrane phase
transition and fluidity (Bayer et al., 2000
; Verkleij and Post, 2000
;
McIntosh et al., 2001
). These differences may extend to the inner and
outer cytoplasmic membrane leaflets, or those of the outer membrane of
Gram-negative bacteria or enveloped viral pathogens (which generally
exhibit properties of their corresponding host cells). Accordingly, the
charge and amphipathicity of the inner and outer membrane leaflets also
vary considerably (Fig. 1). For example, in human erythrocytes, most
glycosylated lipids (glycolipids), PC, PS, and SM are positioned on the
exoplasmic membrane leaflet. Alternatively, when present, neutral or
anionic phospholipids are typically localized on the cytoplasmic
leaflet. Thus, differences in electronegativity resulting from leaflet asymmetry likely provide a further dimension influencing the relative affinity of antimicrobial peptides for biomembranes.
3. Microbial Ligands for Antimicrobial Peptides.
The fact
that D-and L-amino acid versions of
antimicrobial peptides generally show little selectivity in binding
suggests that stereospecific receptors are not present on target
microbial cells (see Section III.). However, certain
structures may be crucial for selective affinity of peptides for
microbial pathogens. For example, Teuber and Bader (1976)
demonstrated
that radioactive mono-N-acetyl-14C or
native polymyxin B absorbed to isolated cytoplasmic and outer membranes
of Salmonella typhimurium within 60 s of exposure.
Moreover, polymyxin B exhibited sigmoidal binding kinetics, suggesting
saturation of cytoplasmic and outer membranes, with approximately 30 and 60 nmol of peptide bound per milligram of membrane, respectively. Importantly, based on the stoichiometry of LPS, PG, CL, and PE in the
membranes, these investigators calculated that the theoretical binding
capacities of polymyxin B were almost identical to the binding
properties if LPS, PG, and CL were modeled to function as specific
receptors for this peptide. This robust concordance between theoretical
and experimental approximations of polymyxin B binding capacities,
along with parallel binding and killing kinetics, argues that membrane
anionic constituents themselves function as pseudoreceptors for this
cationic peptide. Thus, electronegative ligands (e.g., PG, CL, LPS)
likely provide impetus for the initial interaction between cationic
peptides and certain pathogens (also see Sections III. and
IV.).
4. Transmembrane Potential.
Another fundamental difference
between microbial and mammalian cells can be found in the charge
separation between the extracellular and intracellular aspects of the
cytoplasmic membrane. This electrochemical gradient, resulting from
differing extents and rates of proton flux across the membrane, is
termed the transmembrane potential (
). The difference in 
between certain microorganisms and host cells may provide a means of
selective targeting of microorganisms by cationic antimicrobial
peptides. For example, normal mammalian cells exhibit a 
ranging
from
90 to
110 mV. However, bacterial pathogens in logarithmic
phase growth commonly exhibit 
of
130 to
150 mV. Such
significant differences in membrane electrochemistry have been
hypothesized as additional parameters guiding selective toxicity of
antimicrobial peptides, through a mechanism that has been termed
self-promoted uptake (Hancock, 1997
[also see Section III.]).
B. Antimicrobial Peptide Structure-Based Selective Toxicity
Many antimicrobial peptides are believed to exist in relatively
unstructured or extended conformations prior to interaction with target
cells. Others are held in specific conformations by intramolecular
bonds. Upon binding to pathogen membranes, peptides may undergo
significant conformational dynamics to helical or other structures that
effect antimicrobial activity (see below). There is mounting evidence
supportive of the concept that inherent and/or dynamic conformations
among antimicrobial peptides impact their selective toxicity.
Furthermore, peptides may have distinct antimicrobial versus host
cytotoxic conformers and/or undergo conformational phase transition,
self-association, or oligomerization within target pathogen
but not
host cell
membranes, as a means for selective toxicity (also see
Section III.).
Tam et al. (2000)
recently examined the influence of conformation on
membranolytic selectivity of antimicrobial peptides. In these studies,
antimicrobial activity and human cell cytotoxicity were assessed in
conformationally restricted cyclic and noncyclic analogs of
protegrin-1, an 18-amino acid cationic peptide exhibiting broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity. Antimicrobial assays in relatively low- and high-salt conditions revealed cyclic protegrins exert differential antimicrobial profiles against Gram-positive and
Gram-negative bacteria, fungi, and human immunodeficiency virus-1. As
compared to protegrin-1, the most constrained analog (a
cyclic-tricystine protegrin termed ccPG-3) displayed a 10-fold decrease
in hemolytic propensity to human cells and up to a 30-fold increased
membranolytic selectivity against specific target pathogens. However,
an analogous cyclic protegrin lacking a disulfide bond, or a cyclic
mimic of protegrin-1 with one disulfide bond, exhibited antimicrobial
and cytotoxic profiles equivalent to protegrin-1. Interestingly,
circular dichroism showed that even cyclized protegrins stabilized by
disulfide bonds display
-strand structure in water/trifluoroethanol or phosphate-buffered environments. These findings suggest that conformational dynamics subsequent to initial binding contribute to
antimicrobial peptide activity in selected membrane environments.
Related studies by Unger et al. (2001)
provide additional insights into
the structural basis for selective toxicity of antimicrobial peptides.
These investigators examined the interaction of linear versus cyclic
counterparts of melittin and magainin analogs (peptides displaying
non-identical selective toxicity toward mammalian cells) with membrane
models in vitro. As compared with linear versions, the cyclized
peptides were less efficient in initial binding to phospholipid
membranes. However, at normalized bound concentrations, linear and
cyclic analogs retained equivalent potencies to induce membrane
permeabilization. When bound to phospholipid membranes, these cyclized
peptides reverted to ~75% of the helical structure of their linear
analogs. Even more importantly, the cyclic melittin analog exhibited
increased antibacterial activity, with reduced hemolytic propensity,
whereas the cyclic magainin exhibited opposite biological functions.
These observations were interpreted to suggest that conformation
influences initial interactions of peptides with membranes, as well as
ensuing disruptive actions on target membranes. Collectively, these
findings emphasize the potential role for conformational dynamics
subsequent to initial binding interactions in selective toxicity of
antimicrobial peptides. In addition, the above studies lend insights
into the potential for engineered conformational constraints to further
dissociate antimicrobial activity from host cytotoxicity.
Recent studies by Oren and colleagues (1999)
also shed light on the
relationship between quaternary structure and selective toxicity among
antimicrobial peptides. Human cathelicidin LL-37 is an antimicrobial
peptide cytotoxic to both bacterial and mammalian cells. This peptide
exists in equilibrium as monomers and oligomers in solution at low
concentration but appears to undergo self-association within
zwitterionic (mammalian-like) and electronegative (bacterial-like) artificial phospholipid membranes in vitro. Interestingly, in these
models, LL-37 effected a detergent-like or carpet mechanism (see
Section III.) in disrupting both membrane types, suggesting a structure-induced membrane perturbation in either setting. Supportive of this interpretation was the finding that the peptide conformed to a
predominantly
-helical configuration oriented parallel with the
surface of zwitterionic membranes. Thus, a propensity to assume an
invariable helical conformation and multimerize within lipid membranes
of differing compositions may reduce the ability of antimicrobial
peptides to exert selective toxicity against microorganisms versus host cells.
Experiments focusing on cationic antimicrobial peptides of varying
structures and origins extend this theme of peptide interaction with
model membranes of distinct phospholipid compositions (Zhang et al.,
2001
). In these studies, test peptides were uniformly cationic but
varied in conformation, including
-helical,
-sheet, extended, and
cyclic motifs. Regardless of conformation, all test peptides interacted
with and penetrated into lipid monolayers composed of anionic PG, as
measured by the release of preloaded calcein dye. In comparison, only
-helical and extended peptides interacted with monolayers composed
of more zwitterionic PC, albeit to a lesser extent than with the
anionic lipids. Interestingly, a
-sheet peptide induced rapid
phospholipid translocation (movement of lipid from the inner facet to
the outer facet of the membrane) at concentrations less than required
for membrane permeabilization. Similarly, Kol et al. (2001)
demonstrated that the ability of peptides of comparable conformation to
induce phospholipid translocation was greater for those containing
proportionately more lysine or histidine residues, compared with
tryptophan. From these examples, it appears that antimicrobial peptides
not only interact with biomembranes of specific composition and
asymmetry but may also promote remodeling of these membrane properties
within target cells.
C. In Vivo Preferential Affinity for Microorganisms versus Mammalian Cells
Recently, Welling et al. (2001)
tested the hypothesis that
cationic antimicrobial peptides may discriminate between microbial cells and host tissues in vivo. Studies evaluated whether such peptides
specifically accumulate in sites of infection, compared with sterile
inflammatory lesions, due to preferential avidity for microorganisms.
Peptide affinity and specificity for pathogens in vivo was assessed by
intravenous injection of 99mTc-labeled synthetic
derivatives of human ubiquicidin or lactoferrin into animals
experimentally infected with Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella
pneumoniae, or C. albicans. As controls, sterile
inflammatory sites were induced by the introduction of heat-killed
microorganisms or purified LPS into thigh muscle. Labeled human
defensin, human polyclonal IgG, and ciprofloxacin were examined as
comparative agents. The 99mTc-labeled peptides
and defensin accumulated at a significantly higher rate and to a
greater extent in bacteria- and C. albicans-infected lesions
in mice and rabbits, compared with non-infected but inflamed tissues.
These data were interpreted to indicate that the peptides distinguish
between microorganisms and host tissues, and in doing so, accumulate at
sites of infection in vivo.
In related studies, this same group examined the potential
pharmacologic utility of antimicrobial peptides to localize to sites of
infection (Welling et al., 2000
). Biodistribution scintigraphy suggested that the 99mTc-labeled peptides were
rapidly removed from the circulation by renal excretion. However,
despite this rapid clearance, the radiolabeled peptides efficiently
discriminated between infected and non-infected tissue, with up to
5-fold increased binding to target versus nontarget tissues within
1 h in rabbits. Collectively, these results indicate that
antimicrobial peptides rapidly localize and accumulate at sites of
infection, likely due to preferential affinity for peptides to
associate with target microorganism surfaces rather than non-infected tissues.
D. Antimicrobial Peptide Localization to Restrict Exposure of Vulnerable Host Tissues
Selective toxicity among antimicrobial peptides
or the lack
thereof
involves complex interactions between peptide and target cells
as indicated above (also see Section III.). However, it is
also likely that these peptides may be rendered less harmful to the
host simply through strategic localization or expression that minimizes
their interaction with potentially vulnerable host tissues. For
example, many antimicrobial peptides known in vertebrates are secreted
onto relatively inert epithelial surfaces, such as the tracheal,
lingual, or intestinal mucosa of mammals, or the skin of amphibians. In
addition, this localization
along with rapidly inducible
expression
places antimicrobial peptides in key positions to intervene
at perhaps the earliest of opportunities to prevent microbial
colonization or infection.
A similar, albeit more complex mechanism likely contributes to
selective toxicity of antimicrobial peptides found in granules of
phagocytic leukocytes. The fundamental antimicrobial functions of
professional phagocytes include internalization of pathogens (phagocytosis), subjecting them to the harsh microenvironment of the
phagolysosome. Neutrophils, monocytes, and macrophages of various
mammalian species contain among the most potent antimicrobial peptides
known
defensins (see below). However, defensins may also exhibit among
the least selective toxicity of any host defense peptides, often
exerting membrane permeabilizing and other harmful effects on
microorganisms and mammalian cells alike. Phagocytes normally
interiorize and expose pathogens to lethal concentrations of these
peptides within the maturing phagolysosome, rather than degranulating
these potentially injurious components into the extracellular milieu.
Within the restricted confines of the phagolysosome, defensins and
other antimicrobial peptides are present in very high relative
concentrations, where they may act harshly and synergistically with one
another, along with oxidative killing mechanisms. In this way,
defensins may be constrained to granules of mammalian phagocytes to
minimize their potential for host cytotoxicity. Moreover, Shafer et al.
(1986)
and Yeaman (1997)
have suggested that antimicrobial activities
of defensins and platelet microbicidal proteins are potentiated in
mildly acidic conditions, such as those found in the maturing phagolysosome.
Beyond the scope of this review, some antimicrobial peptides may also
perform other important functions contributing significantly to
antimicrobial host defense, including interfering with host cell
receptor access to pathogens, recruitment of leukocytes to sites of
infection, as well as potentiate their antimicrobial activities
(Yeaman, 1997
; Yeaman and Bayer, 1999
; Cole et al., 2001
; Tang et al.,
2002
). For example, Zhang et al. (2002)
have recently found that CD8+
cytotoxic T lymphocytes elaborate
-defensins 1, 2, and 3 in
contributing to host defense against human immunodeficiency virus-1.
Conceivably, these peptides act directly to alter or damage the human
immunodeficiency virus virion, or indirectly by interfering with
receptor targeting, eventual uncoating or replication, and/or enhanced
intracellular destruction. Thus, the extracellular secretion of
antimicrobial peptides at concentrations or in settings that do not
result in host toxicity may play important roles in immunity. Through
such strategies, the antimicrobial functions of peptides and phagocytes
may be mutually amplified, while minimizing the potential for
concomitant host cell toxicity.
E. Themes in Target Affinity and Selective Toxicity of Antimicrobial Peptides
Antimicrobial peptides display highly variable abilities to discriminate between microbial targets versus normal host cells. The governing rules for differences in selective toxicity among such peptides remain to be fully elucidated. However, several themes relating to the structural and functional properties of peptides as they relate to their potential targets include: 1) compositional divergence conveying differential electrostatic affinities for microbial versus host cells; 2) conformational dynamics that promote peptide activation or self-association in microbial membranes, but not others; 3) target cell energetics that accelerate or retard peptide interactions with target versus host membranes, respectively; and 4) limitations in the access of antimicrobial peptides with poor selective toxicity to potentially vulnerable host tissues.
| |
III. Mechanisms of Antimicrobial Peptide Action |
|---|
|
|
|---|
A striking feature among antimicrobial peptides as a group is their overall conservation of structure and charge themes across diverse phyla. Whether synthesized non-ribosomally with D- and L-amino acids, or from genetically encoded messenger RNA, antimicrobial peptides form amphipathic structures and are often cationic at physiological pH. As outlined above, amphipathicity and net charge are characteristics understandably conserved among many antimicrobial peptides. Furthermore, charge affinity is likely an important means conferring selectivity to antimicrobial peptides. In the context of these paradigms, the following discussion highlights current concepts relating to the molecular basis of antimicrobial peptide mechanisms of action.
A. Structural Determinants of Antimicrobial Peptide Activity
An essential requirement for any antimicrobial host defense or
therapeutic agent is that it has a selective toxicity for the microbial
target relative to the host. Ideally, such compounds have affinity for
one or more microbial determinants that are easily accessible, common
to a broad spectrum of microbes, and relatively immutable. Nature has
apparently yielded a class of molecules that meets these constraints in
the evolution of antimicrobial peptides. Antimicrobial peptides
initially target microbial cells, and thus fulfill criteria outlined
above for identifying molecular determinants of pathogens that are
accessible and broadly conserved. As a group, antimicrobial peptides
have amphipathic features that mirror phospholipids, thus allowing them
to interact with and exploit vulnerabilities inherent in essential
microbial structures such as cell membranes. In the following section,
several aspects of antimicrobial peptide structure relevant to
antimicrobial activity and selective toxicity are considered
thematically. Specifically, structural parameters such as conformation
(
), charge (Q), hydrophobicity (H),
hydrophobic moment (MH), amphipathicity
(A), and polar angle (
), are examined in some detail. It
is important to note that these molecular determinants are
interdependent, and therefore, modification of one parameter often
leads to compensatory alterations in others. This holistic view of
peptide structure-activity relationship relates to each of these key
properties influencing mechanisms of action of antimicrobial peptides
(Fig. 2). The following discussion is
considered in this context.
|
1. Conformation (
).
Although antimicrobial peptides differ
widely in sequence and source, several themes in their
three-dimensional topology appear predominant, and peptides have been
categorized accordingly. The two largest groups are the
-helical and
-sheet peptides, whereas the majority of remaining peptides can be
classified as those that are enriched in one or more amino acid
residues [e.g., proline-arginine or tryptophan-rich (Hancock, 1997
)].
Other classification schemes are based upon peptide source (e.g.,
neutrophils or other leukocytes), precursor (e.g., cathelicidin,
derivatives of cathelin), extent of intramolecular bonds (e.g.,
cysteine array or cyclization in peptides), or other parameters.
-helical antimicrobial peptides are abundant in the
extracellular fluids of insects and frogs and frequently exist as extended or unstructured conformers in solution. Many of these peptides
only become helical upon interaction with amphipathic phospholipid
membranes. The
-sheet peptides represent a highly diverse group of
molecules at the level of primary structure. Despite such differences,
these peptides share common features, including amphipathic
composition, with distinct hydrophilic and hydrophobic surfaces. Less
is known about the structures adopted by the proline-arginine-rich and
tryptophan-rich peptides. However, examples of conformations distinct
from prototypic
or
structures have also been identified. For
example, certain proline-arginine-rich peptides, and tryptophan-rich
indolicidin, conform to polyproline helical type II structures (Boman
et al., 19932. Charge (Q).
Many of the antimicrobial peptides
characterized to date display a net positive charge, ranging from +2 to
+9, and may contain highly defined cationic domain(s). Cationicity is
undoubtedly important for the initial electrostatic attraction of
antimicrobial peptides to negatively charged phospholipid membranes of
bacteria and other microorganisms (see Fig. 2), and mutual
electroaffinity likely confers selective antimicrobial targeting
relative to host tissues. The fact that bacterial membranes are rich in
the acidic phospholipids PG, PS, and CL confers their overall negative
charge. Moreover, LPS and teichoic or teichuronic acids of
Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria, impart additional negative
charge to the surfaces of these respective organisms. Target cell

is typically up to 50% greater in prokaryotes than in most
mammalian cells. Thus, it has been proposed that such a chemiosmotic
potential may act in an electrophoretic manner to concentrate
positively charged peptides on microbial surfaces (also see
Section II.).
3. Amphipathicity (A) and Hydrophobic Moment
(MH).
Nearly all antimicrobial peptides form
amphipathic structures upon interaction with target membranes.
Amphipathicity can be achieved via a multitude of protein
conformations; however, one of the simplest and perhaps most elegant is
the amphipathic helix. The amphipathic
-helix has a periodicity of
three to four residues and is optimal for interaction with amphipathic
biomembranes. While the extent of amphipathic helicity influences
peptide activity against negatively charged membranes, it may have an
even more pronounced effect in rendering peptides hemolytic against
zwitterionic or neutral membranes. Thus, a high degree of helicity
and/or amphipathicity yielding a segregated hydrophobic domain, is
correlated with increased toxicity toward cells composed of neutral
phospholipids (Dathe and Wieprecht, 1999
).
-helical content in governing antimicrobial
peptide activity. In a similar study with magainin analogs, the
relative role of hydrophobic moment on membrane binding and
permeabilization was examined (Wieprecht et al., 1997
-sheet antimicrobial peptides are also amphipathic. This
amphipathicity is characterized by a variable number of
-strands, with relatively few or no helical domains, organized to create both
polar and non-polar surfaces. These
-strands are frequently anti-parallel, and are stabilized by a series of disulfide bonds, with
as many as eight cysteines in some peptides [e.g., plant defensins
(Sitaram and Nagaraj, 1999
-defensins). The conformational rigidity observed in
many
-sheet antimicrobial peptides in aqueous solution may also
promote multimerization, limiting exposure of hydrophobic facets to
hydrophilic environments. This configuration contrasts with that of
higher degrees of freedom among the
-helical peptides in similar
solutions. A number of
-sheet peptides have been shown to exist as
dimers in aqueous solution, including the human defensin HNP-3, as
determined by X-ray crystallography. The proposed mechanisms by which
HNP-3 and other defensins or antimicrobial peptides perturb target
membranes involve amphipathicity and hydrophobic moment. For example,
insertion of the hydrophobic peptide face into the lipid bilayer, and
association of the charged arginine side chains with polar lipid head
groups, relies upon three-dimensional separation of hydrophobic and
charge. Once associated with the membrane, the amphipathic nature of
-sheet peptides likely enables their formation of transmembrane
channels. Several models have been proposed to explain the exact
mechanism by which these peptides may form and traverse the channel
(see below); however, the precise conformation adopted by such peptides
in the hydrophobic membrane environment remains to be determined.
However, as in
-helical peptides, it is now apparent that highly
segregated amphipathicity strongly influences
-sheet peptide
disruption of neutral membranes. These findings have led to studies
demonstrating that residue-specific modifications in hydrophobicity
enhance selectivity among cationic peptides. For example, studies using
synthetic derivatives of gramicidin S have revealed that reductions in
hydrophobicity significantly increase selective toxicity against
microorganisms, with approximately 10,000-fold increase in the
estimated therapeutic index of such peptides (Kondejewski et al.,
19994. Hydrophobicity (H). Peptide hydrophobicity, defined as the percentage of hydrophobic residues within a peptide, is approximately 50% for most antimicrobial peptides. Hydrophobicity is an essential feature for antimicrobial peptide membrane interactions, as it governs the extent to which a peptide can partition into the lipid bilayer. Although hydrophobicity is required for effective membrane permeabilization, increasing levels of hydrophobicity are strongly correlated with mammalian cell toxicity and loss of antimicrobial specificity. Therefore, many antimicrobial peptides are moderately hydrophobic, such that they optimize activity against microbial cell membranes.
The relationship between peptide hydrophobicity and membrane permeabilization was examined in an interesting study by Wieprect and coworkers (1997)
1, compared with a
Kapp of 7,400 M
1 for the least hydrophobic peptide. This
difference in binding affinity exemplifies the extent to which
hydrophobicity influences membrane binding and permeabilization.
Furthermore, differences in membrane perturbation were achieved with
relatively minor changes in net peptide hydrophobicity, indicating the
relative significance of hydrophobic features on these interactions.
5. Polar Angle (
).
Polar angle is a measurement of the
relative proportion of polar versus nonpolar facets of a peptide
conformed to an amphipathic helix. For example, in a hypothetical
-helical peptide, in which one facet is exclusively composed of
hydrophobic residues and the other solely composed of charged residues,
the polar angle would be 180o. A reduced
segregation between these domains or an increased hydrophobic
proportion of the helix would proportionately reduce the polar angle.
In numerous studies of native and synthetic peptides, a smaller polar
angle (and therefore a greater hydrophobic surface) is associated with
increased capacity to permeabilize membranes (Dathe et al., 1997
;
Wieprecht et al., 1997
; Uematsu and Matsuzaki, 2000
). The polar angle
has also been shown to correlate with the overall stability and
half-life of peptide-induced membrane pores. In a recent study by
Uematsu Matsuzaki (2000)
, the effects of polar angle on membrane
permeabilization and pore formation were compared. Two model peptides
with polar angles of 100o and
180o showed functional similarities with native
-helical antimicrobial peptides in forming amphipathic helices,
selective targeting of negatively charged membranes, and creating
toroid or lipid-containing pores (see below). Results from these
studies indicated that peptides with smaller polar angles induced
greater membrane permeabilization, translocation, and pore formation
rates (Uematsu and Matsuzaki, 2000
). However, although the rate of pore
formation was greater for peptides with smaller polar angles, the rate
of pore collapse was higher. These results suggest that peptides with
smaller polar angles achieve less stable pore structures compared with
peptides having larger polar angles. Greater stability of pores formed by the latter peptides could result from larger charged surfaces, and/or more peptide molecules per channel. These concepts are consistent with those observed in native peptides, showing that peptide
PGLa (
= 100o) is more easily
translocated than magainin 2 (
=
180o; Matsuzaki, 1998
). These results indicate
that hydrophobic and hydrophilic stereogeometries in antimicrobial
peptides play significant roles influencing the process and
consequences of membrane interaction and disruption.
B. Common Themes in Structural Determinants of Antimicrobial Peptides
The existence of a broad diversity in antimicrobial peptide
sequences and structures underscores the reality that no single antimicrobial peptide sequence has emerged as singularly effective against all pathogens in all settings. Moreover, Nature may have sustained such diversity as a strategy to prevent or delay evolution of
microbial resistance to antimicrobial peptides. Nonetheless, a
circumspect analysis of structural parameters associated with differential antimicrobial activity versus host cell toxicity among
peptides reveals several themes. Conservation in secondary structure
may be key to three-dimensional configurations facilitating antimicrobial activity of distinct peptides. Generally, extremes of
certain features, such as charge, amphipathicity, hydrophobic moment,
or polar angle may disfavor peptide antimicrobial activity and
selective toxicity. A minimum threshold of charge, perhaps as low as
+2, appears necessary for antimicrobial peptide selectivity toward
microorganisms. This property is likely important for a number of
reasons: 1) initial electrostatic attraction to negatively charged
microbial membranes; 2) potential to displace membrane-associated cations; and 3) a strong trans-negative 
of many microorganisms may facilitate cationic peptide transitions in orientation on the
membrane, entry into the polar membrane core, and/or translocate peptides from exoplasmic to cytoplasmic membrane facets. A moderate level of amphipathicity, independent of or in context of polarization of charge, appears to be more favorable in these respects. Segregation of charge and hydrophobicity paralleling the inherent amphipathicity of
the target lipid bilayer may also promote peptide integration into and
disruption of the microbial membrane. A third theme is that selectivity
among membrane-lytic peptides may rely on moderate degrees of
hydrophobicity, as excessive hydrophobicity may increase selectivity
for zwitterionic membranes, increasing mammalian cytotoxicity. Thus,
selective antimicrobial activity results from a delicate balance among
three-dimensional hydrophobic and electrostatic interactions between an
antimicrobial peptide and its target (Dathe et al., 1996
, 1997
).
C. Initial Peptide Interactions with Membrane Targets
As outlined above, antimicrobial peptides are inherently structured to target and interact with biomembranes. More importantly, the initial interaction with the target surface significantly influences subsequent peptide dynamics and membrane-disrupting effects. As discussed below, the basis of this initial interaction integrates biochemical as well as biophysical aspects of the peptide and the target membrane.
1. Electrostatic Interactions.
There is widespread acceptance
that the initial mechanism by which antimicrobial peptides target
microbes occurs via an electrostatic interaction. For example, cationic
antimicrobial peptides and negatively charged lipid membranes of
bacteria provide for a mutual and vigorous attraction. This supposition
has been borne out by numerous studies in which a strong correlation
between peptide charge and membrane binding activity has been
demonstrated (Bessalle et al., 1992
; Vaz Gomes et al., 1993
; Matsuzaki
et al., 1997
; Dathe et al., 2001
). This view is also supported by the
conservation of positive charge within many antimicrobial peptides
isolated from organisms across the evolutionary spectrum. The facts
that electrostatic forces are active over relatively long molecular distances and that lysine and arginine interactions with phosphate groups in lipid bilayers are particularly strong (Mavri and Vogel, 1996
) likely contributes to the initial attraction and
membrane-targeting step of many antimicrobial peptides.

) of most bacterial
membranes likely compounds the biophysical forces driving the
interaction between cationic peptides and target pathogens. Studies
supporting this theory have shown that a membrane potential as low as
20 mV increases the binding constant of the cationic peptide
tachyplesin 200-fold (Matsuzaki, 1997
is required
for nisin activity (Breukink and Kruijff, 1999
relative to that of mammalian cells may be a significant factor contributing to charge-mediated peptide selectivity.
2. Receptor-Mediated Membrane Interactions.
Early studies
using all D-enantiomers of native and model peptides
demonstrated equivalent antimicrobial activities of D- and
L-isoforms. Thus, the prevailing dogma supported a
non-receptor type interaction for antimicrobial peptides with most
pathogen membranes (Bessalle et al., 1990
; Wade et al., 1990
). Since
then, several studies suggest there may be important exceptions to this generalization. Perhaps the most well characterized example is that of
nisin, a small, cyclic, non-ribosomally produced peptide that has been
used in the food industry for several decades. Nisin exhibits
antimicrobial activity in the nanomolar range and specifically binds to
bacterial lipid II, a membrane bound component involved in
peptidoglycan synthesis. When exposed to nisin, vesicles containing lipid II exhibit an ~1000-fold increase in fluorescein leakage compared with vesicles lacking lipid II (Breukink and Kruijff, 1999
).
It has been proposed that this specificity in nisin activity relates to
a specific receptor-like interaction with lipid II and the proximity it
confers to this peptide relative to the microorganism. Notably, lipid
II is believed integral to peptidoglycan synthesis, and nisin is
considerably more active against peptidoglycan-rich Gram-positive
organisms than Gram-negative organisms (Breukink and Kruijff, 1999
).
Likewise, Brotz et al. (1998)
have recently demonstrated that the
lantibiotic mersacidin interferes with transglycosylation and
peptidoglycan synthesis in Gram-positive bacteria by direct targeting
of lipid II. In addition, tachyplesin has been demonstrated to have a
specific affinity for LPS (Hirakura et al., 2002
). Moreover, a number
of studies have now shown non-equivalent activities for native
all-L peptides, versus their all-D enantiomers
(Fehlbaum et al., 1996
; Vunnam et al., 1997
). For example, in
intriguing studies using PR-39, a proline- and arginine-rich peptide of
porcine origin, the all-D enantiomer showed 1000-fold
differences in species-specific activity against bacterial organisms
(Vunnam et al., 1997
). These studies suggest receptor-type interactions
may be important for some peptides in targeting specific epitopes on
the microbial surface.
D. Events Subsequent to Initial Membrane Binding
Perhaps one of the more controversial issues within the field
revolves around the fate of antimicrobial peptides following their
initial interaction with biological membranes. The mechanism(s) by
which peptides may permeabilize and traverse microbial membranes are
not entirely clear and likely vary for different peptides. Uncertainty
stems in part from technical difficulties associated with
first-principle determinations or molecular modeling of peptide-lipid interactions. Attempts to crystallize antimicrobial peptides within a
native lipid environment have been largely unsuccessful, and other
methods of structure determination have various limitations. Conventional CD is an excellent tool for determining peptide secondary structures, such as
-helices. However it necessitates the use of
optically clear solutions and provides little information as to the
relative size of conformer regions or their location (Blondelle et al.,
1999
; Sitaram and Nagaraj, 1999
). Similarly, infrared spectroscopy
(e.g., FTIR) is an important tool particularly well suited to study
-sheet peptide conformations, but also has technical limitations.
Fluorescence spectroscopy is convenient, and its high level of
sensitivity allows for a small sample size. However, data are often
highly dependent on the solvent or membrane mimetic system used.
Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) studies also offer a powerful means to
obtain structural information at the single residue or domain levels
but can be limited by relatively slow rates of molecular reorientation.
Recently developed methods include reverse phase-high pressure liquid
chromatography-based and surface plasmon resonance; however,
these techniques are limited to the extent they represent protein-whole
microorganism interactions. Therefore, at the present time, the most
comprehensive assessments of peptide-lipid structure often come from a
combinatorial approach wherein a variety of methodologies are employed,
and the results are considered collectively.
The following discussion considers events subsequent to peptide-target
binding that may significantly influence peptide mechanisms of action
and/or selective toxicity. Functional themes are reviewed using
examples of prevailing models for these processes, which are proposed
to occur via specific and nonspecific mechanisms. These data should be
interpreted in the context of the specific biophysical methods
employed; the particular conditions and assays utilized for assessing
peptide antimicrobial activities are beyond the scope of this review.
However, it should be understood that the potencies, spectra, and/or
mechanisms of antimicrobial peptide action could be highly dependent
upon conditions of testing. For example, media pH, osmotic and ionic
strength, temperature, and viscosity (e.g., in peptide diffusion
assays)
individually and in combination
may significantly influence
peptide antimicrobial activities.
1. Threshold Concentration.
At some point following initial
membrane binding, peptides enter a second stage of membrane
interaction, frequently referred to as the threshold concentration. In
this phase, peptides begin to enter and traverse the lipid bilayer via
a number of possible mechanisms, ultimately extending their
antimicrobial action to targets interior to the cell membrane.
Conceptually, the threshold concentration necessary to drive such
events results from accumulation of peptides on the target surface.
Parameters that likely influence this threshold include peptide
concentration, propensity to self-assemble or multimerize, as well as
phospholipid membrane composition, fluidity, and head group size (Yang
et al., 2000
). Additionally, it is important to note that individual
peptide-membrane interactions can vary such that one type of peptide
may act via multiple mechanisms dependent on conformation dynamics of
the peptide or target membrane remodeling.

of many bacterial membranes. It is postulated
that membrane potential oriented in this way electrophoretically draws
cationic peptides into the nonpolar membrane environment, effectively
reducing the energy barrier for pore formation. For example, nisin,
which requires a considerable 
for activity, has been shown to
lose its voltage dependence when an N-terminal lysine is replaced with
leucine (Breukink and Kruijff, 19992. Conformational Phase Transition.
A key event occurring
after membrane binding is the process of peptide structural or
conformational phase transition, most well documented for
-helical
antimicrobial peptides. Numerous studies using various biophysical
methodologies show that many antimicrobial peptides are disordered in
aqueous environments, exhibiting extended or random coil conformations
in this setting (Bello et al., 1982
; Dathe and Wieprecht, 1999
).
However, many such peptides rapidly assume highly structured
amphipathic
-helical conformation upon interaction with phospholipid
bilayers or in membrane mimetic solvents. Interestingly, a number of
peptides require a negatively charged bilayer to undergo this
transition. For example, the frog skin peptide PGLa, disordered when
exposed to membranes composed of the zwitterionic PC and SM membranes, adopts a helical structure in the presence of membranes composed of PG
and PE (Latal et al., 1997
). Similarly, magainins only undergo a
helical transition when interacting with anionic membranes as demonstated by CD, (Matsuzaki et al., 1989
, 1991
),
vibrational/Raman-FTIR (Williams et al., 1990
; Hirsh et al., 1996
) and
NMR (Bechinger et al., 1993
; Hirsh et al., 1996
). Examination of
cecropin analogs revealed that the extent of
-helical conformation
is proportionately dependent on the amount of negatively charged
phospholipid within the model membrane (Wang et al., 1998
). One
mechanism by which such a relationship may promote peptide order relies
on the inherent phospholipid packing within the bilayer. For example,
interactions of the peptide with the phospholipid head groups may
promote an optimal periodicity within the charged residues of the
peptide, promoting folding of the
-helix. As discussed above, this
change in conformation would also likely alter peptide hydrophobic
moment and polar angle. Another potentially important aspect of the
conformational phase transition is that it may prevent indiscriminant
membranolytic activity until the peptide identifies an appropriate
target surface. Thus, a lack of bioactive structure at nontarget sites
may be an important means by which antimicrobial peptides minimize
host-cell toxicity.
-sheet antimicrobial peptides are typically much more
ordered in aqueous solution and membrane environments, due to
constraints imposed by disulfide bonds or cyclization of the peptide
backbone. For example, the secondary structure of tachyplesin, a cyclic
-sheet peptide that contains a type-II
-turn, is largely
unchanged as the peptide moves from an aqueous environment to that of a
membrane-mimetic (Oishi et al., 1997
-sheet peptides are likely relatively stable upon
interaction with target cell membranes. However, it is possible that
the quaternary peptide structures proposed for some
-sheet peptides
in aqueous solution are dissociated upon interaction with the membrane
surface. In contrast to
-helical peptides, the potential
monomerization of such peptides could also facilitate antimicrobial
mechanisms or selective toxicity.
3. Self-Association and Multimerization. Considerable evidence suggests that antimicrobial peptides may self-associate or multimerize following initial interactions with target membranes. These peptide-peptide and peptide-lipid interactions within membranes likely create complex structures associated with specific antimicrobial peptide mechanisms of action. However, the potential for a peptide to form quaternary structures is fundamentally related to the inherent composition and conformation of the peptide in its monomeric form. For example, peptides with well defined hydrophobic and hydrophilic domains may efficiently orient these facets toward respective membrane constituents, or corresponding domains in adjacent peptides. Such orientations may facilitate amphipathic peptides partitioning more deeply into the hydrophobic membrane core than would likely occur otherwise. Assembly of peptide complexes in this way may create the existence of transmembrane pores or channels, which meay be selective or non-selective. For example, peptide structures may assume configurations in which hydrophobic surfaces are aligned toward the membrane such that a hydrophilic channel is lined only by polar and charged facets of individual peptides.
A number of models for antimicrobial peptide membrane permeabilization have been proposed. Given the variability in microbial membrane ultrastructure, a given peptide may act via different mechanisms in distinct membrane environments. The models described below here have been largely derived from results examining activities of individual peptides or analogs against artificial membrane systems. It should be pointed out that there is no universal consensus among investigators in this regard. Therefore, the following models are compared with illustrate advances in proposed mechanisms of antimicrobial peptide action.4. The Barrel-Stave Mechanism.
The term barrel-stave
describes the overall topology of a membrane channel formed in this
mechanism of membrane permeabilization. In this model, a variable
number of channel-forming peptides are positioned in a
"barrel-like" ring around an aqueous pore. The "stave" term
refers to individual transmembrane spokes within this barrel, which may
be composed of individual peptides or peptide complexes. In this
mechanism, the hydrophobic surfaces of
-helical or
-sheet
peptides face outward, toward the acyl chains of the membrane, whereas
the hydrophilic surfaces form the pore lining (Ehrenstein and Lecar,
1977
; Breukink and Kruijff, 1999
). The initial step in barrel-stave
pore formation involves peptide binding at the membrane surface, most
likely as monomers. Upon binding, the peptide may undergo a
conformational phase transition, forcing polar-phospholipid head groups
aside to induce localized membrane thinning. At this point, the
hydrophobic portion of the peptide is inserted into the membrane to an
extent corresponding to the hydrophobicity of the membrane outer
leaflet. Positioning of the positively charged amino acids near the
phospholipid head groups facilitates this process. When bound peptide
reaches a threshold concentration, peptide monomers self-aggregate and
insert deeper into the hydrophobic membrane core. Aggregation allows
for a minimal exposure of the peptide hydrophilic residues to the
hydrophobic membrane interior, as the peptides adopt a transmembrane
configuration. Continued accretion of peptide monomers results in
further expansion of the membrane pore. Upon phospholipid translocation
or relaxation of the pore, peptides are transported to the inner
membrane leaflet aspect due to the concentration gradient of
surface-bound peptide, as well as trans-negative 
. An example of
such a mechanism of action has been proposed for alamethicin (Sansom,
1991
; Beven et al., 1999
; Yang et al., 2001
). Alamethicin-induced
membrane conductance has been measured to proceed as a pattern of
multistate conductance levels. This finding suggests the existence of
pores with openings of various diameters, corresponding to channels composed of four or more transmembrane-spanning peptides. However, there remain relatively few peptides for which there is compelling evidence of a barrel-stave mechanism, despite this model having been
proposed more than a decade ago. More recent studies often support the
toroid pore model (see below; Yang et al., 2000
, 2001
). These newer
data may reflect refinements in methodology and offer a clearer
understanding of biophysical properties of transmembrane pores or
channels that may incorporate lipid and peptide moieties.
5. The Toroid Pore or Wormhole Mechanism.
One of the most
well characterized peptide-membrane interactions is that of the toroid
pore. A primary difference between the toroid pore and barrel-stave
models is that in the former, lipids are intercalated with peptide in
the transmembrane channel. Therefore, this structure has been referred
to as a supramolecular complex and represents a membrane-spanning pore
lined with polar peptide surfaces as well as phospholipid head groups.
The toroid pore model has been deduced principally from experiments
using
-helical peptides, including magainins and PGLa. In this
model, peptides in the extracellular environment take on an
-helical structure as they interact with the charged and hydrophobic bacterial membrane. Helices are initially oriented parallel to the membrane surface as confirmed by NMR, fluorescence quenching, and CD (Hara et
al., 2001
). The hydrophobic residues of the bound peptides displace the
polar head groups, creating a breach in the hydrophobic region and
inducing positive curvature strain in the membrane (Hara et al., 2001
).
The introduction of strain and thinning further destabilizes the
membrane surface integrity, making it more vulnerable to ensuing
peptide interactions. At a threshold peptide-to-lipid ratio (e.g.,
estimated to be 1:30 for magainin), peptides orient perpendicular to
the membrane. At this point, helices may begin to self-associate, such
that their polar residues are no longer exposed to the membrane
hydrocarbon chains. This transient and multimeric composite forms the
dynamic peptide-lipid supramolecular or toroidal pore complex. The
biophysical sequence of toroid pore formation by antimicrobial peptides
has recently been examined in studies by Yang et al. (2000)
. Upon
disintegration of the pore, some peptide becomes translocated to the
cytoplasmic leaflet of the membrane (Uematsu and Matsuzaki, 2000
),
suggesting that toroid pore disassembly may be a key mechanism by which
peptides enter the microbial cytoplasm to access potential
intracellular targets.
6. The Carpet Mechanism.
Models of nonspecific membrane
permeabilization by antimicrobial peptides traditionally include
diffuse effects that have been equated with detergents. In this sense,
some peptides may act against microorganisms through a relatively
diffuse manner, termed the carpet mechanism. However, peptides that
employ this mechanism are not indiscriminate membrane detergents. In
the carpet model, a high density of peptides accumulates on the target
membrane surface. Phospholipid displacement changes in membrane
fluidity and/or reductions in membrane barrier properties subsequently lead to membrane disruption. As in other models, peptides initially bind to the membrane mainly via electrostatic interactions, carpeting the phospholipid bilayer (Shai and Oren, 2001
). However, no specific quaternary structure ensues in the carpet mechanism. Thus, when a
threshold peptide density or concentration is reached, the membrane is
subjected to unfavorable energetics, and membrane integrity is lost.
From this perspective, membrane dissolution occurs in a dispersion-like
manner that does not involve channel formation, and peptides do not
necessarily insert into the hydrophobic membrane core. For example,
cecropin P1, derived from moth hemolymph, appears to target
microorganisms in this manner. Attenuated total reflectance FTIR
spectroscopy indicates that this peptide initially orients parallel to
the membrane and does not enter the hydrophobic environment. This
orientation destabilizes phospholipid packing and causes membrane
disruption due to a concentrated layer of peptide monomers on the
surface (Sitaram and Nagaraj, 1999
). Likewise, fluorescence spectroscopy indicates that the tryptophan-rich peptide indolicidin does not enter the bilayer to any significant degree, yet this peptide
is an efficient antimicrobial agent (Rozek et al., 2000
). It has been
noted that most of the studies focusing on the carpet mechanism of
membrane disruption utilize membrane models rich in PS (Matsuzaki,
1998
, 1999
). As with any mechanism of action, it is possible that
alternate results may be obtained using different membrane models or
assay conditions.
E. Mechanisms of Cell Death
Another area of intensive focus regarding antimicrobial peptide biology relates to the precise mechanisms by which antimicrobial peptides cause cell death. A long-held paradigm for microbicidal action has been that peptides kill microorganisms by causing multiple and insurmountable defects in target microbial cell membranes. In this respect, peptides may create membrane pores in the organism as described above, leading to leakage of ions and metabolites, ensuing depolarization, loss of membrane-coupled respiration and biopolymer synthesis, and ultimately cell death. It is likely that these effects contribute to mechanisms by which antimicrobial peptides exert their effects. However, a mounting body of evidence supports additional or complementary mechanisms, wherein membrane permeabilization alone appears insufficient to cause cell death. Data supporting this latter concept come from studies documenting a clear dissociation between membrane perturbation and cell death. In these cases, cell killing may proceed with relatively little membrane disruption per se, due rather to disruption of intracellular processes.
1. Membrane Dysfunction. The cytoplasmic membrane is responsible for mediating many essential functions in microbial pathogens. Such functions include selective permeability and maintenance of gradients, cellular energetics driven by electron transport and oxidative phosphorylation in bacteria and mitochondria in eukaryotic pathogens, synthesis and cross-linking of peptidoglycan, chitin, or other biopolymers, motility, and processing or display of adhesins or other key virulence determinants. Conceivably, outer and/or cytoplasmic membrane dysfunctions caused by antimicrobial peptides may globally interfere with one or more of these functions, leading to cell death directly or indirectly.
Studies addressing the mechanisms of antimicrobial-peptide-mediated cell death indicate that, for some peptides, cell killing may begin as quickly as 2 to 3 min after initial exposure (Lehrer et al., 1989
of
150 mV versus
100 mV (Yeaman et al.,
1998
,
membrane permeabilization, depolarization, and lethality. In this
study, the profile of membrane depolarization appeared to be specific
to each peptide, and was linked to a relationship between mechanism and

of the different S. aureus strains. However, membrane
permeabilization, depolarization, and cell killing by platelet
microbicidal proteins were uniformly greater against the strain bearing
the increased 
(
150 mV). In contrast, the staphylocidal
activity of defensin hNP-1 was not significantly different against
these two S. aureus strains.
Given that microbial cell membranes are responsible for multiple and
essential functions, it is not surprising that cell death due to
antimicrobial peptides has been primarily attributed to membrane
dysfunction. However, it should be emphasized that membrane perturbation alone may not be sufficient to effect killing of microbial
pathogens by antimicrobial peptides. This point has been underscored in
two recent investigations. Koo et al. (2001)2. Inhibition of Extracellular Biopolymer
Synthesis.
Inhibition of peptidoglycan, chitin, or other
macromolecular synthesis may also be an important mechanism of
antimicrobial peptide action. For example, peptidoglycan biosynthesis
is integrally related to membrane integrity and function. Peptidoglycan
precursors are activated and transported across the cytoplasmic
membrane, and cross-linking occurs in the immediate proximity of this
setting. As described above, cationic or other peptides likely perturb membrane and peptidoglycan synthesis integrity, such that direct or
indirect inhibition of peptidoglycan precursor synthesis,
translocation, and/or cross-linking may result. Given their greater
peptidoglycan content, Gram-positive organisms may be particularly
susceptible to this putative mechanism of action; however, testing of
this hypothesis awaits further investigation. However, seminal plasmin, an antimicrobial protein from bovine seminal plasma, inhibits peptidoglycan synthesis in E. coli (Chitnis and Prasad,
1990
). Interestingly, interference with peptidoglycan synthesis was
observed to precede and occur independently of growth inhibition.
Likewise, fungal biopolymers such as chitin may be similarly or
uniquely vulnerable to inhibition by antifungal peptides.
3. Inhibition of Intracellular Functions.
Although membrane
perturbation almost certainly contributes to antimicrobial peptide
mechanisms of action, recent studies suggest that disruption of key
intracellular processes may contribute to or be required for cell death
(Lehrer et al., 1989
; Park et al., 1998
; Sharma et al., 1999
). These
concepts imply a temporal and functional dissociation of membrane
permeabilization, depolarization, and target cell viability. In some
cases, microorganisms may survive for extended periods of time
following membrane permeabilization, suggesting that non-membranolytic
mechanisms are responsible for cell death. In studies by Xiong and
coworkers using tPMPs, S. aureus cells remained viable long
after rapid membrane permeabilization. tPMP-mediated inhibition of DNA
and/or RNA synthesis corresponded temporally with cell death but was
not observed until 30 or more minutes after membrane permeabilization
(Xiong et al., 2002
). Interestingly, staphylocidal effects did not
appear to result from global cellular dysfunctions, since protein
synthesis was inhibited to an equivalent extent in strains susceptible
or resistant to tPMP-1. Moreover, pre-exposure to agents that
selectively inhibit protein synthesis (30 S or 50 S subunit inhibitors)
or DNA metabolism (DNA gyrase) mitigated subsequent tPMP-1 induced
killing of an otherwise susceptible S. aureus strain in
vitro. These findings implicate a direct inhibition of
nucleic acid synthesis by tPMPs. The relatively strong negative charge
of nucleic acids is consistent with the hypothesis that cationic
peptides bind to and inhibit these molecules, not unlike histone
proteins. Kragol et al. (2001)
recently showed that the insect
antibacterial peptides pyrrhocoricin, drosocin, and apidaecin inhibit
the bacterial heat shock protein DnaK, and inhibition of this protein
is associated with cell death. It is possible that pyrrhocoricin may
also prevent chaperone-assisted folding of proteins in susceptible
organisms. Similarly, buforin II has been reported to penetrate
microbial cell membranes and interfere with intracellular functions
(Park et al., 1998
). The antimicrobial peptide, microcin B17, is also
believed to inhibit an intracellular target within E. coli.
This peptide has been suggested to specifically inhibit DNA replication
by targeting DNA gyrase. The specificity of this intracellular
mechanism of cell death was demonstrated in a recent study in which
mutants resistant to killing by microcin B17 were found to have a
single point mutation in DNA gyrase (del Castillo et al., 2001
; also, see below).

in C. albicans. Furthermore,
fluorescein isothiocyanate-labeled peptide colocalized with a specific
mitochondrial dye, and the uptake of histatin-5 was mitigated by
inhibitors of respiration in vitro. These data were interpreted to
suggest that this peptide internalizes within C. albicans
and specifically targets to the energized mitochondrion.
The above observations suggest that peptide-mediated cell death may
occur as a result of several independent or cooperative mechanisms of
action; the latter phenomenon has been referred to as a "multi-hit
process" (Zhang et al., 2000F. Synergy among Antimicrobial Peptides
To minimize experimental variability, microbiological and
biophysical studies typically examine the biological activities of
individual antimicrobial peptides in isolation. However, as it
inevitably occurs in Nature, antimicrobial peptides may interact simultaneously with microbial pathogens in a variety of settings, including complex mixtures within phagolysosomes or into equally complex extracellular milieus. Therefore, antimicrobial peptides likely
interact with one another, with microorganisms, and with host molecules
prior to or at these sites. At present, a number of studies suggest
that such heterologous peptide interactions may indeed be important to
overall antimicrobial activity. For example, Tang et al. (2002)
found
that two antimicrobial peptides from human platelets, platelet factor-4
and connective tissue activating peptide-3, synergistically inhibit
E. coli. These peptides appear to be generated
simultaneously from activated platelets, thus their synergy is believed
relevant in vivo. Likewise, studies of magainin 2 and PGLa from
Xenopus laevis skin suggest such a similarly favorable
interaction. The minimum inhibitory concentration for either peptide
alone was ~ 40 µg/ml; however, their minimum inhibitory
concentration in combination was reduced by 20-fold (Westerhoff et al.,
1995
). Furthermore, in chemical cross-linking studies, these peptides
form a parallel heterodimeric complex with a 1:1 stoichiometry (Hara et
al., 2001
). Pores formed by this heterodimer are more stable than those
formed by either peptide alone. Synergism has also been demonstrated
with magainin 2 plus tachyplesin (Kobayashi et al., 1991), the frog
dermaseptins (Mor et al., 1994
), and with helical antimicrobial
peptides in combination with nalidixic acid (Zhang et al., 1999
). Yan
and Hancock (2001)
have demonstrated that various antimicrobial
peptides function synergistically with lysozyme in vitro. Taken
together, the above findings substantiate multiple mechanisms by which
antimicrobial peptides effect target cell killing. Undoubtedly, as
experimental methodologies become more refined, future studies will
more clearly assess the complex interactions among multiple
antimicrobial peptides and their targets in situ.
G. Themes in Mechanisms of Action of Antimicrobial Peptides
As outlined above, antimicrobial peptides exert multiple and
simultaneous effects that likely account for their generally rapid and
potent antimicrobial activities. These actions are often microbicidal,
resulting from irreversible and overwhelming disruption in essential
cellular structure and/or function. In concept, antimicrobial peptide
mechanisms of action adopt parallel themes despite wide diversities
among source, composition, and conformation. These common themes seem
to integrate the following events: 1) initial interaction with target
cells due to electrostatic, hydrophobic, or other affinities based on
biochemical and biophysical correspondence; 2) conformational phase
transition in the framework of the target membrane (e.g., transition to
-helical conformational dynamics); 3) accumulation to a threshold
stoichiometry facilitating active peptide monomer or multimer
nonspecific membrane disruption (i.e., carpet mechanism), or
self-association and ensuing pore or channel formation (i.e.,
barrel-stave or toroid pore mechanisms); 4) transient or prolonged
membrane disruption yielding permeabilization, depolarization, and
related perturbations that may cause direct and indirect dysfunction; and 5) peptide translocation across the membrane to access and inhibit
intracellular targets (see Fig. 3).
|
| |
IV. Mechanisms of Antimicrobial Peptide Resistance |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Nature hates
monoply...every excess causes a defect
every
defect an excess...
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Microbial pathogens occupy and exploit a diverse variety of tissues and niches where they must confront antimicrobial peptide-mediated host defenses to survive. Thus, it is unrealistic to expect that no microbial pathogens are able to resist antimicrobial peptides. Rather, it is essential to understand whether a pathogen resists a given peptide, and if so, through constitutive or inducible mechanisms. As with any anti-infective agent, the answer to this question may have important implications regarding the potential use of antimicrobial peptides as agents or models in development of novel therapeutic agents to prevent or treat infection (Fig. 4).
|
A. Constitutive and Inducible Resistance
Pathogens capable of surviving exposure to antimicrobial peptides appear to employ two fundamentally distinct strategies: constitutive resistance versus inducible resistance. Constitutive (passive) mechanisms of resistance refer to inherent properties of an organism that confer resistance and are normally expressed even in the absence of peptide exposure. Alternatively, inducible (adaptive) resistance mechanisms include those triggered in response to the antimicrobial peptide or the target cell stresses it causes. In many respects, these strategies exist as a continuum of coordinate response systems that provide pathogens with the greatest likelihood of survival in diverse contexts containing antimicrobial peptides.
B. Constitutive (Passive) Resistance
An interesting observation yet to be fully explained is that of
the inherent ability of certain microorganisms to resist killing by
diverse types of antimicrobial peptides. For example, in a variety of
studies, Serratia, Proteus, and Providencia
species often prove to be refractory to inhibition or killing by
cationic peptides (Viljanen and Vaara, 1984
). Burkholderia
(formerly Pseudomonas) species also exhibit exceptionally
broad resistance to antimicrobial peptides in vitro (Manniello et al.,
1978
). These examples illustrate the likelihood that certain microbial
pathogens are inherently more resistant to antimicrobial peptides due
to stable structural or functional properties or pathogenesis strategies.
1. Inherent Mechanisms of Resistance to Antimicrobial
Peptides.
The molecular basis for comprehensive peptide
resistance is not clear. However, several intriguing observations may
provide insights into the possible reasons. At some point in their
mechanism of action, antimicrobial peptides interact with the outermost surface of the target pathogen. Thus, it is conceivable that such surfaces inherently lack electrostatic affinity for, or may even repel,
cationic antimicrobial peptides. As will be described below, certain
staphylococcus species constitutively express membranes with reduced
negative charge. In Enterococcus, resistance to
antimicrobial peptides has been associated with unusual susceptibility
and resistance patterns to conventional antibiotics that target their
cell membrane or wall. For example, Cashman et al. (1998)
demonstrated
that Enterococcus species exhibit broad resistance to a
panel of cationic antimicrobial peptides and heavy metal ions.
Furthermore, these investigators identified an inverse correlation
between glycopeptide susceptibility and resistance to cationic
antimicrobial peptides or oxidized metal ions among enterococcal
clinical isolates. This finding suggested that mechanisms conferring
inherent resistance to antimicrobial peptides may predispose some
pathogens to the inhibitory effects of unrelated agents.
2. Altered Membrane Energetics.
The activities of several
types of antimicrobial peptides have been shown to be influenced by
target cell growth phase or transmembrane potential. For example, the
type-I (highly cationic)
-defensins appear to exert equivalent
antimicrobial potency against metabolically energetic or quiescent
bacteria (Lehrer and Ganz, 1996
). However, type-II defensins exert
maximal antimicrobial activity against highly energized cells. These
distinctions illustrate the concept that antimicrobial peptides may
have significantly reduced potencies against organisms with inherently
low 
or that have the capability to adapt to such a status.

display reduced susceptibilities to some but not all antimicrobial peptides (Yeaman et al., 1998
. Similar relationships in
antimicrobial peptide resistance have also been observed in the fungal
pathogen, C. albicans. Gyurko and colleagues studied the
histatin-5 susceptibility of petite mutants (analogous to small colony
variants in bacteria; see below) of C. albicans, deficient
in respiration resulting from mutations in mitochondrial DNA (Gyurko et
al., 20003. Electrostatic Shielding. Many virulent bacterial or fungal pathogens rely upon elaboration of a capsule as a means of adherence to tissue or avoidance of opsonization and phagocytosis. Thus, capsule production is an important virulence factor Prticularly among microorganisms that colonize or infect the mammalian bloodstream, respiratory tract, and gastrointestinal mucosa. Yet, there is relative little information available from which to assess the role of pathogen capsule or glycocalyx expression related to resistance to antimicrobial peptides. Capsular compositions vary widely among different organisms. However, the glycocalyx of many microbial pathogens is often composed of an anionic complex of carbohydrate and phosphate. Thus, it is reasonable to hypothesize that matrices such as these sequester cationic antimicrobial peptides, preventing them from accessing their intended targets.
Pseudomonas aeruginosa exhibits an unusual propensity to infect tissues in which dysfunctional salt transport results in abnormal tissue physiology, abnormal phagocyte function, and increased local ionicity. Examples of such settings are found in burn wounds, and airways of cystic fibrosis patients. In such microenvironments, chronic pseudomonal infection and persistent inflammation often leads to fibrotic transformation of tissue and may trigger fulminant sepsis. Alginic acid is a highly anionic capsular exopolysaccharide produced by virulent strains of P. aeruginosa. Friedrich et al. (1999)4. Niche-Specific Resistance. The concept of niche-specific resistance to antimicrobial peptides integrates many aspects of constitutive resistance described above. This model is based on the hypothesis that some pathogens may resist antimicrobial peptides to which they would otherwise be susceptible, simply by virtue of their affinity for or exploitation of certain anatomical or physiological niches. Several examples can be used to illustrate this concept.
As outlined above, reductions in cellular energetics appear to negatively influence the activity of antimicrobial peptides that rely on
for target affinity and/or mechanism of action. Proctor and
coworkers have shown that S. aureus may utilize such a
strategy to survive within the interior of vascular endothelial cells
(Proctor et al., 1994
was
significantly more resistant to antimicrobial peptide effects compared
with its parental counterpart. Taken together, this evidence suggests
that S. aureus cells may enter host cells, reversibly assume
an SCV phenotype to circumvent killing by antimicrobial peptides (as
well as other antimicrobial agents), and thereby persist within this
setting to await future pathogenesis strategies or opportunities.
Other examples of niche-specific resistance to antimicrobial peptides
relate to the potential for organisms to exploit specific anatomic
settings as a means of circumventing the effects of antimicrobial peptides. For example, as indicated above, P. aeruginosa is
an opportunistic pathogen that preferentially colonizes tissues having abnormal osmotic or ionic strength. Results consistent with this theme
have also been obtained from studies examining S. aureus or
C. albicans proliferation within distinct tissues in an
experimental model of infective endocarditis (Yeaman et al., 1996;
Dhawan et al., 1997C. Inducible (Adaptive) Resistance
Most pathogens encounter numerous potentially lethal host defense mechanisms, including antimicrobial peptides, which must be negotiated for the pathogen to survive and proliferate. Thus, many pathogenic microorganisms have evolved an array of inducible countermeasures intended to suppress or subvert the effects of these host defense mechanisms. Adaptive responses may range from rapidly inducible activation of virulence factors and responses acutely required for survival to chronic strategies that eventuate toward permanent modifications. Moreover, most mechanisms of peptide resistance represent microbial responses that are diametrically opposed to mechanisms of peptide action. The following discussion considers themes in antimicrobial peptide resistance from these perspectives.
1. Coordinate Microbial Responses to Antimicrobial Peptide
Stress.
Exposure to antimicrobial peptides represents a
potentially lethal stress condition, against which rapid and conserved
response pathways have evolved. This cascade of responses is often
referred to as the starvation/stress response. For example, in
bacteria, inducible resistance to antimicrobial peptides is largely
controlled through sophisticated sensor-transducer response systems.
Among the first to observe this phenomenon were Fields et al. (1989)
, who determined that a specific genetic locus of the pathogen S. typhimurium is integral to intracellular survival in macrophages and virulence in mice by conferring resistance to a defensin peptide. Several two-component regulatory mechanisms are now recognized and
believed to activate a diverse spectrum of adaptive survival responses
in a variety of pathogens. Recently, Oh et al. (2000)
demonstrated that
sublethal levels of cecropins induce hyperosmotic stress response
systems in E. coli. However, Hong and coworkers (2003)
found
that sublethal concentrations of cecropin A prompted a pattern of
genomic response in this organism that is distinguishable from that of
lethal concentrations, and distinct from global stress response systems
such as heat-shock, hyperosmotic, or oxidative response paradigms.
Thus, transcriptional profiling studies such as this may advance our
understanding of coordinate responses to antimicrobial peptide-induced stress.
2. Adaptive Mechanisms of Resistance to Antimicrobial Peptides. Constitutive and inducible mechanisms of resistance to antimicrobial peptides are becoming clearer with the advent of genetically modified pathogens and the availability of reagent quantities of native or synthetic antimicrobial peptides. As with constitutive responses, it is not surprising that many of the mechanisms responsible for inducible resistance involve modifications of the pathogen envelope and/or extracellular facet of the cytoplasmic membrane directly offsetting mechanisms of peptide action. The following examples are intended to highlight recent insights and advances in these areas.
3. Proteases and Peptidases.
One of the clearer examples of
protease-mediated resistance to antimicrobial peptides can be
illustrated from studies examining well characterized Gram-negative
bacterial pathogens. As described above, PhoP/PhoQ-like systems
regulate many of the countermeasures employed by bacteria to resist
antimicrobial peptides. Among these, the PgtE protein was recently
demonstrated by Guina et al. (2000)
to be an outer membrane
endopeptidase in Salmonella. This molecule was identified as
having structural features consistent with the outer membrane protease
families OmpT or protease VII of E. coli (Sugimura and
Nishihara, 1988
), and Pla of Yersinia (Sodeinde et al., 1992
). These proteases specifically cleave peptides between paired basic residues and at the carboxy-terminal aspect of basic amino
acid residues that precede a nonpolar residue. Thus, a variety of
amphipathic and cationic antimicrobial peptides are potential substrates of PgtE protease. These properties distinguish
OmpT/PgtE-type proteases from trypsin-like enzymes, with the former
being optimally active at pH 6.0, sensitive to the inhibitor
diisopropyl fluorophosphate, and to the divalent cations
Cu2+, Fe+2, and
Zn2+ (Sugimura and Nishihara, 1988
).
-helical peptides that contain predicted
OmpT cleavage sites. However, PgtE protease does not confer to
Salmonella increased resistance to antimicrobial peptides
exhibiting amphipathic
-sheet conformation induced by intramolecular
disulfide bonds (e.g., defensins or protegrins). Therefore the
three-dimensional structures of the latter peptides likely create
steric hindrance protective against the activity of PgtE protease. As
above, PgtE-mediated resistance to antimicrobial peptides presumbably
acts in consort with surface modification resistance mechanisms in
Salmonella or other pathogens (see below).
Other protease have also been implicated in antimicrobial peptide
resistance of S. aureus and E. coli (Ulvatne et
al., 2002
mutant accumulated significantly more
inflammatory cells compared with the pla+
counterpart strain. Likewise, S. pneumoniae secretes
extracellular proteases believed integral to immuno-avoidance. For
example, logarithmic phase pneumococci degrade complement protein C3
rapidly, through cell-associated activity that is independent of the
presence of the polysaccharide capsule (Angel et al., 19944. Extracellular Structural Modifications. Antimicrobial peptides initially target and interact with microbial structures exterior to the cytoplasmic membrane. Thus, microbial pathogens have evolved mechanisms by which these targets may be modified to resist peptide targeting and circumvent the ensuing antimicrobial mechanisms.
Coordinate systems commonly regulate expression of countermeasures needed for pathogen survival in response to antimicrobial peptide exposure. Conceptually, this feedback mechanism must be rapidly inducible and triggered in part by the presence or action of the peptide itself. For example, significant fluctuations in Mg2+ or Ca2+ concentrations (intracellular or transcellular) induced by antimicrobial peptides have been suggested to activate the Salmonella PhoP/PhoQ locus (Groisman, 20015. Resistance Modifications of the Cytoplasmic
Membrane.
Among the earliest observations that microbial
pathogens adaptively modify their cytoplasmic membrane to resist
cationic antimicrobial peptides were made by Dorrer and Teuber (1977)
.
In their studies, a shift of Pseudomonas fluorescens from
phosphate-rich into phosphate-limited medium yielded a dramatic decline
in cytoplasmic membrane PE, PG, and CL composition. Equally important
was the observation that, concomitant with these changes in anionic
phospholipids, a cationic ornithine-amide constituent emerged in
membranes. Increasing resistance to polymyxin B paralleled the steady
increase in the amount of this lipid. Furthermore, intact cells, in
addition to isolated cytoplasmic or outer membranes of resistant
organisms, displayed significantly reduced binding capacities for
polymyxin B. These findings were taken as evidence that cationic
polymyxin B exerts its antibiotic activity in part via high affinity
binding to comparatively electronegative bacterial membrane constituents.
6. Efflux-Dependent Resistance Mechanisms.
Efflux has also
emerged as a mechanism by which microbial pathogens may resist
antimicrobial peptides. In Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Shafer et
al. (1998)
have shown that resistance to antibacterial peptides of
diverse structure is mediated in part by an energy-dependent efflux
system termed mtr. Evidence also indicates the MtrCDE complex ejects
antibiotics, dyes, and detergents, suggesting this mechanism protects
the pathogen against mucosal or other endogenous or exogenous antimicrobials within and beyond the genitourinary tract. A similar mechanism has been shown to confer antimicrobial peptide resistance to
Yersinia (Bengoechea and Skurnik, 2000
). In this latter
pathogen, efflux of antimicrobial peptides appears to involve a
potassium antiporter system formed by the RosA and RosB proteins
(Stumpe and Bakker, 1997
; also see above). Importantly, the
RosA/RosB gene regulon appears to be inducible upon exposure
to antimicrobial peptides and may enhance the survival of the organism
in the acidic and antimicrobial peptide-rich environment of the phagolysosome.
7. Modification of Intracellular Targets.
A temporal and
functional separation between initial membrane interaction and
subsequent cell death supports the concept that antimicrobial peptides
access and inhibit essential microbial targets interior to the
cytoplasmic membrane. Accordingly, new data indicate the existence of
complex mechanisms that specifically modify these intracellular targets
to confer resistance. For example, del Castillo and colleagues have
identified a mutation in the gyrB gene that is associated
with a significant reduction of E. coli susceptibility to
microcin B17, an antimicrobial peptide believed to inhibit DNA
replication (del Castillo et al., 2001
). This mutation yields
replacement of tryptophan 751 by arginine in the GyrB polypeptide,
ostensibly reducing microcin B17 targeted inhibition of DNA gyrase.
These studies represent areas of research focusing on the growing
awareness that antimicrobial peptides exert mechanisms of action that
transcend their initial interaction with phospholipid bilayers.
| |
V. Prospectus: Therapeutic Targets of Antimicrobial Peptides |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Recent studies have significantly advanced our understanding of the mechanisms of antimicrobial peptide action and resistance. Such advances have revealed new insights into potentially vulnerable microbial structures and functions that may facilitate the discovery and development of novel anti-infective agents or strategies. For example, new efforts are increasingly focused on targeting sensitive microbial structures or functions, disabling pathogen adaptive response mechanisms, and exploiting specific contexts or virulence factors characteristic of infection. These approaches may take advantage of unique situations associated with pathogenesis or host response to govern and optimize antimicrobial peptide targeting and selective toxicity. The following comments highlight concepts emerging in these areas.
A. Reconstitution or Potentiation of Conventional Antibiotic Efficacy
The most obvious potential therapeutic applications for
antimicrobial peptides or derived mimetics relate to their use to reconstitute or amplify the antimicrobial efficacies of conventional antibiotics. For example, given their propensity to permeabilize target
microbial membranes, antimicrobial peptides may facilitate conventional
agents in overcoming access-based resistance mechanisms such as reduced
uptake or enhanced efflux. Alternatively, peptides that interact with
intracellular processes or targets could be engineered or selected to
noncompetitively augment the targets and mechanisms of classical
antibiotics. Moreover, the potential for synergistic activities among
antimicrobial peptides in combination is only recently becoming more
fully appreciated (e.g., Tang et al., 2002
). While many convincing
examples of these favorable interactions have been observed in vitro,
the challenge remains to understand and apply the mechanistic
foundations thereof, which will guide the identification and
formulation of optimal peptide-antibiotic and/or peptide-peptide
combinations or their equivalents in vivo.
B. Unique and Specific Microbial Targets
Structural and functional attributes unique to antimicrobial
peptide interactions with pathogens offer new insights for development of novel anti-infective agents derived from these ancient host defense
molecules. Molecular determinants that are emerging as potential
targets for antimicrobial peptide strategies include microbial
receptors, metabolic processes, energetics, or essential pathways,
virulence factors such as surface adhesins and envelope proteins, as
well as intracellular targets such as ribosomes, mitochondria, or
nucleic acids. In addition, antimicrobial peptides may be useful in
potentiating microbial targets vulnerable to related immune mechanisms.
For example, opsonophagocytic enhancement of organisms exposed to
antimicrobial peptides has been hypothesized to augment the ability of
phagocytes to kill microorganisms intracellularly (Yeaman, 1997
).
Furthermore, increasing awareness of the close structural and
functional relationship between antimicrobial peptides and certain
cytokines suggests a convergence of their roles in antimicrobial host
defense. For example, the chemokines RANTES, platelet factor-4, and
IP-10 are among the cytokines that have now been shown to exhibit
antimicrobial activity in vitro (Yeaman, 1997
; Cole et al., 2001
; Tang
et al., 2002
). Exploiting these developments will require further
dissection of the molecular basis underlying peptide differentiation of
appropriate microbial targets from those of hosts, emphasizing
selective activity without concomitant host cytotoxicity. In these
respects, experimental approaches integrated with molecular modeling of
critical structure-activity relationships in the mechanisms of
antimicrobial peptide activities will continue to play important roles.
C. Targeting Strategic Microbial Response Pathways
It is likely that antimicrobial peptides target constitutive and inducible properties of pathogens as targets of their mechanisms of action. For example, modification of characteristic membrane energetics, surface ligands, or expression of virulence factors may be avenues exploited by antimicrobial peptides in host defense. In addition, antimicrobial peptide-induced responses such as these almost certainly evoke global changes in pathogen status and virulence capability. For example, responses necessary for survival upon exposure to antimicrobial peptides may prompt organisms to dramatically compromise virulence factor or surface feature expression, which may be required for adhesion, colonization, or immunoavoidance. Likewise, the unregulated activation of signal transduction pathways or response regulons upon exposure to antimicrobial peptides or their analogs may lead to pathogen incapacitation and eventual cell death due to global dysregulation. Even if nonlethal, these effects may render pathogens at greatly increased vulnerability to clearance by other host defense mechanisms.
D. Engineering New Anti-Infectives Based on Peptide Structure and Function
Antimicrobial peptides have been in use to prevent or treat
infections for many decades. For example, polymyxins, gramicidins, and
bacitracin can be found in many topical applications. Lantibiotics, antimicrobial peptides derived from bacteria, have been used to preserve livestock feed for many years. Clinical trials assessing the
efficacies of topical and systemic peptide anti-infectives are underway
but have yet to receive approval for use. Thus, the concept that
antimicrobial peptides may be utilized to prevent or treat disease is
not novel. However, advances in understanding the structural and
mechanistic aspects of antimicrobial peptides may accelerate the
development of improved anti-infective agents. For example, a clearer
recognition of how antimicrobial peptides differentiate between
pathogen and host cells holds the promise of designing agents with
greater selective toxicity. In this respect, efforts to identify and
constrain peptides to antimicrobial conformations may allow the
engineering of novel agents with potent efficacy against even the most
antibiotic-resistant pathogens, without concomitant host cytotoxicity.
Examples include use of native peptides, their engineered derivatives
or mimetics (Shankaramma et al., 2002
; Yeaman et al., 2002
), and/or
non-peptide small molecules that recapitulate strategic and/or
favorable structure-activity relationships. Beyond these direct
applications, the identification of specific peptide mechanisms of
action may also reveal vulnerable targets suitable for exploitation by
novel small molecule agents with favorable pharmacologic properties.
As with all new agents, pharmacologic and production issues will
require optimization if antimicrobial peptides or their mimetic derivatives are to become standard therapeutic agents (Zasloff, 2002
).
For example, historically, the development of peptide agents has been
limited by concerns relating to manufacturing methods, costs, and
quality control. Recent advances in eukaryotic expression systems,
synthesis platforms, and evaluation methods have greatly reduced, but
not altogether resolved, these challenges. In addition, uncertainties
related to the potential systemic use of peptides require more complete
study. However, recent findings demonstrate that synthetic
antimicrobial peptides can be designed to exert potential antimicrobial
effects in complex biomatrices, including blood and blood fractions
(Yeaman et al., 2002
). Mimetic peptides, designed in part based on
antimicrobial peptides from platelets (PMPs and tPMPs) exerted dramatic
efficacy against serum-resistant E. coli in human blood, plasma, and
serum. It is important to emphasize that antimicrobial efficacy was
retained even when peptides were incubated in these biomatrices for up
to 2 h before introduction of the organism. In some conditions,
peptide microbicidal activities exceeded that of gentamicin tested in
parallel in these complex conditions. Moreover, the peptides appeared
to favorably interact with endogenous antimicrobial components present
in blood and blood fractions. These promising results illustrate the
potential advantages of developing antimicrobial peptides or analogs
thereof mindful of contexts corresponding to their source, so as to
optimize their natural structure-activity relationships and
antimicrobial spectra. In this sense, peptides may necessitate new and
unique approaches regarding dosage and administration to optimize
distribution and clearance, degradation and immunogenicity, as well as
the molecular basis for potential acute or chronic untoward effects. A
more subtle but nonetheless important element of this perspective will
rely on a greater acceptance by the medical and commercial sectors for
new approaches to managing infections caused by pathogens resistant to
conventional modalities. Yet, progress is being made, and the reality
of burgeoning resistance to conventional antimicrobial agents will
drive further advances. Thus, antimicrobial peptide structure and
function as conserved by Nature over an evolutionary timespan offers
hope for discovery and development of improved agents to prevent or
treat infectious diseases caused by pathogens that resist conventional
antimicrobial agents.
| |
VI. Summary |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Research focusing on the structures and functions of antimicrobial peptides from diverse sources has burgeoned in recent years. Investigations in this area have identified compelling themes among mechanisms of antimicrobial peptide action and resistance. Composition and conformation yield signature three-dimensional distributions of charge and hydrophobicity among antimicrobial peptides. Differences in biochemical and biophysical properties of microbial versus host cells, and the settings in which these cells are exposed to peptides, provide an additional basis for selective toxicity of antimicrobial peptides. Many antimicrobial peptides employ dynamic mechanisms of action that go beyond the phospholipid bilayer to effect rapid and potent activities. These structure-activity themes of antimicrobial peptides are consistent with their likely multiple roles in antimicrobial host defense. However, microbial pathogens have evolved constitutive or inducible countermeasures to subvert antimicrobial peptide mechanisms of action. Many such resistance pathways are highly coordinated and triggered by exposure to antimicrobial peptides themselves. Thus, a more thorough understanding of the balance between the opposing mechanisms of action and resistance among antimicrobial peptides will further reveal how these molecules function to defend against infection. These insights may provide novel strategies or templates from which novel agents may be developed to improve the prevention or treatment of infections, particularly those caused by pathogens resistant to conventional antibiotics. Thus, pharmacologic agents may be discovered and developed that target strategic microbial structures or functions, suppress pathogen resistance to host defenses, and restore or potentiate the activities of conventional antibiotics against drug-resistant pathogens. From these perspectives, the mechanisms of antimicrobial peptide action and resistance may hold many secrets yet to be uncovered or fully appreciated.
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Several colleagues were instrumental in the development of this review. Among these, Eric Brass offered key insights and perspectives that are sincerely appreciated. Likewise, Jack Edwards provided invaluable support. We acknowledge Bill Welch, Stasi Dodson, Arnold Bayer, Yan-Qiong Xiong, Alan Waring, Paul Sullam, Kimberly Gank, and Steve Projan for their helpful comments. Finally, we recognize the pioneers of this field and those who continue to make new and fascinating contributions that advance it. We greatly appreciate the support of David Weaver. The efforts of the Robert M. Delzell Foundation are sincerely appreciated. The authors were supported in part by grants from the National Institutes of Health (AI-39108 and AI-48031).
| |
Footnotes |
|---|
Address correspondence to: Dr. Michael R. Yeaman, UCLA School of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, St. John's Cardiovascular Research Center, Harbor-UCLA Research and Education Institute, 1124 West Carson Street, RB-2, Torrance, CA 90502. E-mail: mryeaman{at}ucla.edu
DOI: 10.1124/pr.55.1.2
| |
Abbreviations |
|---|
PC, phosphatidylcholine; PE, phosphatidylethanolamine; SM, sphingomyelin; PG, phosphatidylglycerol; CL, cardiolipin; PS, phosphatidylserine; LPS, lipopolysaccharide; CD, circular dichroism; FTIR, Fourier-transform infrared; PMP, platelet microbicidal protein; tPMP, thrombin-induced PMP; SCV, small colony variant.
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
how pathogenic bacteria resist cationic polypeptides.
J Exp Med
193:
F31-F34
-sheet tachyplesin I with lipopolysaccharides.
Biochim Biophys Acta
1562:
32-36[Medline].
-helical magainin 2 and cyclic
-sheet tachyplesin I: toward cocktail therapy.
Biochemistry
40:
14330-14335[CrossRef][Medline].
0031-6997/03/5501-27-55$7.00
PHARMACOLOGICAL REVIEWS
Copyright © 2003 by The American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
S. Arafah, M.-L. Rosso, L. Rehaume, R. E. W. Hancock, M. Simonet, and M. Marceau An iron-regulated LysR-type element mediates antimicrobial peptide resistance and virulence in Yersinia pseudotuberculosis Microbiology, July 1, 2009; 155(7): 2168 - 2181. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. Senyurek, M. Paulmann, T. Sinnberg, H. Kalbacher, M. Deeg, T. Gutsmann, M. Hermes, T. Kohler, F. Gotz, C. Wolz, et al. Dermcidin-Derived Peptides Show a Different Mode of Action than the Cathelicidin LL-37 against Staphylococcus aureus Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., June 1, 2009; 53(6): 2499 - 2509. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Wang, W. Ma, R. She, Qu. Sun, Y. Liu, Y. Hu, L. Liu, Y. Yang, and K. Peng Effects of swine gut antimicrobial peptides on the intestinal mucosal immunity in specific-pathogen-free chickens Poult. Sci., May 1, 2009; 88(5): 967 - 974. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Harris, H. M. Mora-Montes, N. A. R. Gow, and P. J. Coote Loss of mannosylphosphate from Candida albicans cell wall proteins results in enhanced resistance to the inhibitory effect of a cationic antimicrobial peptide via reduced peptide binding to the cell surface Microbiology, April 1, 2009; 155(4): 1058 - 1070. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. Gao, P. Sherman, L. Luo, J. Bowie, and S. Zhu Structural and functional characterization of two genetically related meucin peptides highlights evolutionary divergence and convergence in antimicrobial peptides FASEB J, April 1, 2009; 23(4): 1230 - 1245. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. S. Wilkinson, K. Dhaliwal, T. W. Hamilton, A. F. Lipka, L. Farrell, D. J. Davidson, R. Duffin, A. C. Morris, C. Haslett, J. R.W. Govan, et al. Trappin-2 Promotes Early Clearance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa through CD14-Dependent Macrophage Activation and Neutrophil Recruitment Am. J. Pathol., April 1, 2009; 174(4): 1338 - 1346. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Samant, F.-F. Hsu, A. A. Neyfakh, and H. Lee The Bacillus anthracis Protein MprF Is Required for Synthesis of Lysylphosphatidylglycerols and for Resistance to Cationic Antimicrobial Peptides J. Bacteriol., February 15, 2009; 191(4): 1311 - 1319. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. L. Mellbye, S. E. Puckett, L. D. Tilley, P. L. Iversen, and B. L. Geller Variations in Amino Acid Composition of Antisense Peptide-Phosphorodiamidate Morpholino Oligomer Affect Potency against Escherichia coli In Vitro and In Vivo Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., February 1, 2009; 53(2): 525 - 530. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Yang, V. D. Gordon, D. R. Trinkle, N. W. Schmidt, M. A. Davis, C. DeVries, A. Som, J. E. Cronan Jr., G. N. Tew, and G. C. L. Wong Mechanism of a prototypical synthetic membrane-active antimicrobial: Efficient hole-punching via interaction with negative intrinsic curvature lipids PNAS, December 30, 2008; 105(52): 20595 - 20600. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
O. Cirioni, C. Silvestri, R. Ghiselli, F. Orlando, A. Riva, F. Mocchegiani, L. Chiodi, S. Castelletti, E. Gabrielli, V. Saba, et al. Protective effects of the combination of {alpha}-helical antimicrobial peptides and rifampicin in three rat models of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection J. Antimicrob. Chemother., December 1, 2008; 62(6): 1332 - 1338. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. L. Mangoni, R. F. Epand, Y. Rosenfeld, A. Peleg, D. Barra, R. M. Epand, and Y. Shai Lipopolysaccharide, a Key Molecule Involved in the Synergism between Temporins in Inhibiting Bacterial Growth and in Endotoxin Neutralization J. Biol. Chem., August 22, 2008; 283(34): 22907 - 22917. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. D. Gank, M. R. Yeaman, S. Kojima, N. Y. Yount, H. Park, J. E. Edwards Jr., S. G. Filler, and Y. Fu SSD1 Is Integral to Host Defense Peptide Resistance in Candida albicans Eukaryot. Cell, August 1, 2008; 7(8): 1318 - 1327. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Hawrani, R. A. Howe, T. R. Walsh, and C. E. Dempsey Origin of Low Mammalian Cell Toxicity in a Class of Highly Active Antimicrobial Amphipathic Helical Peptides J. Biol. Chem., July 4, 2008; 283(27): 18636 - 18645. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Harder, R. Glaser, and J.-M. Schroder Review: Human antimicrobial proteins effectors of innate immunity Innate Immunity, December 1, 2007; 13(6): 317 - 338. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Ghiselli, A. Giacometti, O. Cirioni, F. Mocchegiani, C. Silvestri, F. Orlando, W. Kamysz, A. Licci, P. Nadolski, A. Della Vittoria, et al. Pretreatment With the Protegrin IB-367 Affects Gram-Positive Biofilm and Enhances the Therapeutic Efficacy of Linezolid in Animal Models of Central Venous Catheter Infection JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr, November 1, 2007; 31(6): 463 - 468. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. O. Morton, A. Hayes, M. Wilson, B. M. Rash, S. G. Oliver, and P. Coote Global Phenotype Screening and Transcript Analysis Outlines the Inhibitory Mode(s) of Action of Two Amphibian-Derived, {alpha}-Helical, Cationic Peptides on Saccharomyces cerevisiae Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., November 1, 2007; 51(11): 3948 - 3959. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
O. Cirioni, R. Ghiselli, C. Silvestri, W. Kamysz, F. Orlando, F. Mocchegiani, F. Di Matteo, A. Riva, J. Lukasiak, G. Scalise, et al. Efficacy of Tachyplesin III, Colistin, and Imipenem against a Multiresistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa Strain Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., June 1, 2007; 51(6): 2005 - 2010. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. Radzishevsky, M. Krugliak, H. Ginsburg, and A. Mor Antiplasmodial Activity of Lauryl-Lysine Oligomers Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., May 1, 2007; 51(5): 1753 - 1759. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. D. Fjell, R. E.W. Hancock, and A. Cherkasov AMPer: a database and an automated discovery tool for antimicrobial peptides Bioinformatics, May 1, 2007; 23(9): 1148 - 1155. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Mukhopadhyay, W. Whitmire, Y. Q. Xiong, J. Molden, T. Jones, A. Peschel, P. Staubitz, J. Adler-Moore, P. J. McNamara, R. A. Proctor, et al. In vitro susceptibility of Staphylococcus aureus to thrombin-induced platelet microbicidal protein-1 (tPMP-1) is influenced by cell membrane phospholipid composition and asymmetry Microbiology, April 1, 2007; 153(4): 1187 - 1197. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Munoz, B. Lopez-Garcia, and J. F. Marcos Studies on the Mode of Action of the Antifungal Hexapeptide PAF26 Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., November 1, 2006; 50(11): 3847 - 3855. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
O. Cirioni, A. Giacometti, C. Silvestri, A. Della Vittoria, A. Licci, A. Riva, and G. Scalise In Vitro Activities of Tritrpticin Alone and in Combination with Other Antimicrobial Agents against Pseudomonas aeruginosa Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., November 1, 2006; 50(11): 3923 - 3925. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Q. Xiong, A. S. Bayer, L. Elazegui, and M. R. Yeaman A Synthetic Congener Modeled on a Microbicidal Domain of Thrombin- Induced Platelet Microbicidal Protein 1 Recapitulates Staphylocidal Mechanisms of the Native Molecule Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., November 1, 2006; 50(11): 3786 - 3792. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. Steffen, S. Rieg, I. Wiedemann, H. Kalbacher, M. Deeg, H.-G. Sahl, A. Peschel, F. Gotz, C. Garbe, and B. Schittek Naturally processed dermcidin-derived peptides do not permeabilize bacterial membranes and kill microorganisms irrespective of their charge. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., August 1, 2006; 50(8): 2608 - 2620. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. J. Rodriguez-Hernandez, J. Saugar, F. Docobo-Perez, B. G. de la Torre, M. E. Pachon-Ibanez, A. Garcia-Curiel, F. Fernandez-Cuenca, D. Andreu, L. Rivas, and J. Pachon Studies on the antimicrobial activity of cecropin A-melittin hybrid peptides in colistin-resistant clinical isolates of Acinetobacter baumannii J. Antimicrob. Chemother., July 1, 2006; 58(1): 95 - 100. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Martinez, J. A. Bengoechea, and F. Cuttitta Molecular Evolution of Proadrenomedullin N-Terminal 20 Peptide (PAMP): Evidence for Gene Co-Option Endocrinology, July 1, 2006; 147(7): 3457 - 3461. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Pochet, S. Tandel, S. Querriere, M. Tre-Hardy, M. Garcia-Marcos, M. De Lorenzi, M. Vandenbranden, A. Marino, M. Devleeschouwer, and J.-P. Dehaye Modulation by LL-37 of the Responses of Salivary Glands to Purinergic Agonists Mol. Pharmacol., June 1, 2006; 69(6): 2037 - 2046. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Elahi, R. M. Buchanan, S. Attah-Poku, H. G. G. Townsend, L. A. Babiuk, and V. Gerdts The Host Defense Peptide Beta-Defensin 1 Confers Protection against Bordetella pertussis in Newborn Piglets Infect. Immun., April 1, 2006; 74(4): 2338 - 2352. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. G Perron, M. Zasloff, and G. Bell Experimental evolution of resistance to an antimicrobial peptide Proc R Soc B, January 22, 2006; 273(1583): 251 - 256. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Zilbauer, N. Dorrell, P. K. Boughan, A. Harris, B. W. Wren, N. J. Klein, and M. Bajaj-Elliott Intestinal Innate Immunity to Campylobacter jejuni Results in Induction of Bactericidal Human Beta-Defensins 2 and 3 Infect. Immun., November 1, 2005; 73(11): 7281 - 7289. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Mota-Meira, H. Morency, and M. C. Lavoie In vivo activity of mutacin B-Ny266 J. Antimicrob. Chemother., November 1, 2005; 56(5): 869 - 871. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. A. K. Harvey, E. G. Romanowski, K. A. Yates, and Y. J. Gordon Adenovirus-Directed Ocular Innate Immunity: The Role of Conjunctival Defensin-like Chemokines (IP-10, I-TAC) and Phagocytic Human Defensin-{alpha} Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., October 1, 2005; 46(10): 3657 - 3665. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Bjorstad, H. Fu, A. Karlsson, C. Dahlgren, and J. Bylund Interleukin-8-Derived Peptide Has Antibacterial Activity Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., September 1, 2005; 49(9): 3889 - 3895. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Q. Xiong, K. Mukhopadhyay, M. R. Yeaman, J. Adler-Moore, and A. S. Bayer Functional Interrelationships between Cell Membrane and Cell Wall in Antimicrobial Peptide-Mediated Killing of Staphylococcus aureus Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., August 1, 2005; 49(8): 3114 - 3121. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. M. Rausch, J. R. Marks, and W. C. Wimley Rational combinatorial design of pore-forming {beta}-sheet peptides PNAS, July 26, 2005; 102(30): 10511 - 10515. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Viejo-Diaz, M. T. Andres, and J. F. Fierro Different Anti-Candida Activities of Two Human Lactoferrin-Derived Peptides, Lfpep and Kaliocin-1 Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., July 1, 2005; 49(7): 2583 - 2588. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. S. Radzishevsky, S. Rotem, F. Zaknoon, L. Gaidukov, A. Dagan, and A. Mor Effects of Acyl versus Aminoacyl Conjugation on the Properties of Antimicrobial Peptides Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., June 1, 2005; 49(6): 2412 - 2420. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Raimondo, G. Andreotti, N. Saint, P. Amodeo, G. Renzone, M. Sanseverino, I. Zocchi, G. Molle, A. Motta, and A. Scaloni A folding-dependent mechanism of antimicrobial peptide resistance to degradation unveiled by solution structure of distinctin PNAS, May 3, 2005; 102(18): 6309 - 6314. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Pietiainen, M. Gardemeister, M. Mecklin, S. Leskela, M. Sarvas, and V. P. Kontinen Cationic antimicrobial peptides elicit a complex stress response in Bacillus subtilis that involves ECF-type sigma factors and two-component signal transduction systems Microbiology, May 1, 2005; 151(5): 1577 - 1592. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. W. McMichael, A. Roghanian, L. Jiang, R. Ramage, and J.-M. Sallenave The Antimicrobial Antiproteinase Elafin Binds to Lipopolysaccharide and Modulates Macrophage Responses Am. J. Respir. Cell Mol. Biol., May 1, 2005; 32(5): 443 - 452. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. M. Phadke, B. Deslouches, S. E. Hileman, R. C. Montelaro, H. C. Wiesenfeld, and T. A. Mietzner Antimicrobial Peptides in Mucosal Secretions: The Importance of Local Secretions in Mitigating Infection* J. Nutr., May 1, 2005; 135(5): 1289 - 1293. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. S. McIntosh, J. E. Cade, M. Al-Abed, V. Shanmuganathan, R. Gupta, A. Bhan, P. J. Tighe, and H. S. Dua The Spectrum of Antimicrobial Peptide Expression at the Ocular Surface Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., April 1, 2005; 46(4): 1379 - 1385. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Vila-Perello, A. Sanchez-Vallet, F. Garcia-Olmedo, A. Molina, and D. Andreu Structural Dissection of a Highly Knotted Peptide Reveals Minimal Motif with Antimicrobial Activity J. Biol. Chem., January 14, 2005; 280(2): 1661 - 1668. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. C. Monk, K. Niimi, S. Lin, A. Knight, T. B. Kardos, R. D. Cannon, R. Parshot, A. King, D. Lun, and D. R. K. Harding Surface-Active Fungicidal D-Peptide Inhibitors of the Plasma Membrane Proton Pump That Block Azole Resistance Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., January 1, 2005; 49(1): 57 - 70. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. Y. Yount, K. D. Gank, Y. Q. Xiong, A. S. Bayer, T. Pender, W. H. Welch, and M. R. Yeaman Platelet Microbicidal Protein 1: Structural Themes of a Multifunctional Antimicrobial Peptide Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., November 1, 2004; 48(11): 4395 - 4404. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. Guerrero, J. M. Saugar, K. Matsuzaki, and L. Rivas Role of Positional Hydrophobicity in the Leishmanicidal Activity of Magainin 2 Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., August 1, 2004; 48(8): 2980 - 2986. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. Y. Yount and M. R. Yeaman Multidimensional signatures in antimicrobial peptides PNAS, May 11, 2004; 101(19): 7363 - 7368. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. P. Concannon, T. D. Crowe, J. J. Abercrombie, C. M. Molina, P. Hou, D. K. Sukumaran, P. A. Raj, and K. -P. Leung Susceptibility of oral bacteria to an antimicrobial decapeptide J. Med. Microbiol., December 1, 2003; 52(12): 1083 - 1093. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
Read all eLetters
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |