4.4 Article

Growth inhibition of phytopathogenic spiroplasmas by membrane-interactive antimicrobial peptides Novispirin T7 and Caerin 1.1

期刊

ANNALS OF APPLIED BIOLOGY
卷 180, 期 1, 页码 109-117

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/aab.12715

关键词

bacterial pathogen; cell wall-less bacteria; citrus stubborn disease; corn stunt disease; Mollicutes

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study focused on screening antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) for their potential to inhibit the growth of Spiroplasma kunkelii and Spiroplasma citri. Among the tested AMPs, Novispirin T7 and Caerin 1.1 demonstrated efficacy comparable to tetracycline against these phytopathogenic spiroplasmas. The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of the AMPs against S. kunkelii and S. citri were determined in this study.
Spiroplasma kunkelii and Spiroplasma citri, both helical-shaped cell wall-less bacteria, are the causative agents of corn stunt disease and citrus stubborn disease, respectively. Plants exhibiting natural resistance to these phytopathogenic spiroplasmas are currently lacking. Engineering artificial plant resistance using antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) has been conceived as a new approach to control the agronomically important spiroplasmal diseases. In preparation for such task, the present study focused on screening of AMPs that have potentials to curb the growth of S. kunkelii and S. citri. Four AMPs, including Novispirin T7, Caerin 1.1, Tricholongin and Dhvar4, were selected for in vitro growth inhibition test. A liquid assay method was developed for quick qualitative and quantitative evaluations of the AMPs. Our results demonstrated that Novispirin T7 and Caerin 1.1 were able to inhibit the growth of both phytopathogenic spiroplasmas with the efficacy comparable to that of tetracycline. Cell deformations were observed in spiroplasma cultures treated with these two peptides, indicating interactions of the AMPs with the spiroplasma cell membranes. The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of the AMPs against S. kunkelii and S. citri were determined.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据