4.2 Article

New Oxadiazole Derivatives: Synthesis and Appraisal of Their Potential as Antimicrobial Agents

期刊

LETTERS IN DRUG DESIGN & DISCOVERY
卷 15, 期 1, 页码 21-30

出版社

BENTHAM SCIENCE PUBL LTD
DOI: 10.2174/1570180814666170425160545

关键词

Oxadiazole; antimicrobial; D-alanine:d-alanine ligase docking; drug resistance; schiff bases; agents

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: The escalating threat due to dwindling effect of antibiotics and challenge of tackling rising drug-resistant infections has gathered high focus in current medicinal research. Methods: In an attempt to find new molecules that can defeat microbial resistance, two new series of 2-[2-substituted ethenyl]-5-(substituted methoxy)-1,3,4-oxadiazole derivatives were synthesized. Various aromatic hydrazides were allowed to undergo cyclization to substituted oxadiazole-2-amines in the presence of cyanogen bromide and further condensed with different heterocyclic aldehydes to give new oxadiazole derivatives. The synthesized molecules were fully characterized by various spectral techniques and tested for antimicrobial activity. Results: Almost all the newly synthesized compounds especially (5g-5l) displayed remarkable growth inhibition against three bacterial strains: M. smegmatis, S. aureus, E. coli and fungi C. albicans. The antimicrobial activity was further confirmed by MIC assay against the same microorganisms. Oxadiazole 5g displayed promising activity with a MIC value of 0.025 mM for two bacteria and fungi, whereas MIC of this compound for E. coli was 0.1 mM. Other active compounds (5h-5l) also exhibited good MIC ranging between 0.313 to 5.0 mM against the selected microorganisms. Docking simulations were generated to explore the potential binding approaches of ligand 5g at the D-alanine: d-alanine ligase (Ddl) protein of E. coli and S. aureus. Conclusion: Molecule 5g was active even at a lower concentration and could probably act as a prospective lead molecule for targeting the drug resistant microorganisms.

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

4.2
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