4.7 Article

Reactive oxygen species-independent apoptotic pathway by gold nanoparticles in Candida albicans

期刊

MICROBIOLOGICAL RESEARCH
卷 207, 期 -, 页码 33-40

出版社

ELSEVIER GMBH, URBAN & FISCHER VERLAG
DOI: 10.1016/j.micres.2017.11.003

关键词

Gold nanoparticles; Genomic DNA interactions; Mitochondrial dysfunction; ROS-independent apoptosis; Candida albicans

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Korea government (MSIP) [2015R1A5A6001906]
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea [2015R1A5A6001906] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Candida albicans is the most common pathogenic fungus in humans, causing cutaneous and life-threatening systemic infections. In this study, we confirmed using propidium iodide influx that gold nanoparticles (AuNPs), which are promising materials for use as antimicrobial agents, did not affect the membrane permeability of C. albicans. Thus, the fungal cell death mechanisms induced by AuNPs were assessed at intracellular levels including DNA damage, mitochondrial dysfunction, and reactive oxygen species (ROS) overproduction. AuNPs interacted with C. albicans DNA leading to increased nuclear condensation and DNA fragmentation. Changes in the mitochondria induced by AuNPs involving mass, Ca2+ concentrations, and membrane potential indicated dysfunction, though the level of intracellular and mitochondrial ROS were maintained. Although ROS signaling was not disrupted, DNA damage and mitochondrial dysfunction triggered the release of mitochondrial cytochrome c into the cytosol, metacaspase activation, and phosphatidylserine externalization. Additionally, the AuNPs-induced apoptotic pathway was not influenced by N-acetylcysteine, an ROS scavenger. This indicates that ROS signaling is not linked with the apoptosis. In conclusion, AuNPs induce ROS-independent apoptosis in C. albicans by causing DNA damage and mitochondria dysfunction.

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