4.7 Article

Exploration of Novel Scaffolds Targeting Cytochrome b of Pyricularia oryzae

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms24032705

关键词

high-throughput virtual screening; rice blast; antifungals; cytochrome bc1 enzymatic inhibition; design and synthesis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The European Farm to Fork strategy requires reducing the use of synthetic pesticides, which exposes vulnerable agricultural sectors like European risiculture to devastating diseases and endangers food security. Therefore, novel scaffolds need to be identified for the synthesis of environmentally friendly fungicides.
The fulfilment of the European Farm to Fork strategy requires a drastic reduction in the use of at risk synthetic pesticides; this exposes vulnerable agricultural sectors-among which is the European risiculture-to the lack of efficient means for the management of devastating diseases, thus endangering food security. Therefore, novel scaffolds need to be identified for the synthesis of new and more environmentally friendly fungicides. In the present work, we employed our previously developed 3D model of P. oryzae cytochrome bc1 (cyt bc1) complex to perform a high-throughput virtual screening of two commercially available compound libraries. Three chemotypes were selected, from which a small collection of differently substituted analogues was designed and synthesized. The compounds were tested as inhibitors of the cyt bc1 enzyme function and the mycelium growth of both strobilurin-sensitive (WT) and -resistant (RES) P. oryzae strains. This pipeline has permitted the identification of thirteen compounds active against the RES cyt bc1 and five compounds that inhibited the WT cyt bc1 function while inhibiting the fungal mycelia only minimally. Serendipitously, among the studied compounds we identified a new chemotype that is able to efficiently inhibit the mycelium growth of WT and RES strains by ca. 60%, without inhibiting the cyt bc1 enzymatic function, suggesting a different mechanism of action.

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

4.7
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