Advertisement

Computational Peptide Engineering Approach for Selection the Best Engendered Camel Lactoferrin-Derive Peptide with Potency to Interact with DNA

  • 8 Accesses

Abstract

Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) are native and safe short peptides with valuable biological effects. Nowadays, these components and their importance have attracted the attention of many researchers to determine their mode of action. Computational peptide engineering can donate a useful insight for investigating the stability and potency of AMPs. In the present study, to improve the effect of CLF36, a chimeric peptide derived camel lactoferrin, the atomic insight into peptide-DNA interaction was analyzed using MD simulation. Targeted mutants were performed in wild type amino acid sequences and obtained engineered peptides were homology modeled for peptide-DNA interaction analysis. SASA, Hydrogen binding and free binding energy analyses revealed that all changes in wild type of peptide in this study improved the peptide-DNA interaction. Our in silico results showed that simultaneous substitution of GLU12 with ALA and also removing SER36 in wild type had more substantial effects on complex formation with DNA. The obtained result of this study could be useful to improve the stability and potency of engineered peptides to use of in the experimental study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant unlimited access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Price includes VAT for USA

Subscribe to journal

Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.

US$ 99

This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

References

  1. Abraham MJ, Murtola T, Schulz R, Páll S, Smith JC, Hess B, Lindahl E (2015) GROMACS: High performance molecular simulations through multi-level parallelism from laptops to supercomputers. SoftwareX 1:19–25

  2. Bandyopadhyay S, Lee M, Sivaraman J, Chatterjee C (2013) Model membrane interaction and DNA-binding of antimicrobial peptide Lasioglossin II derived from bee venom. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 430:1–6

  3. Berendsen HJ, Postma JP, van Gunsteren WF, Hermans J (1981) Interaction models for water in relation to protein hydration. Intermolecular Forces. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-7658-1_21

  4. Berendsen HJ, van der Spoel D, van Drunen R (1995) GROMACS: a message-passing parallel molecular dynamics implementation. Comput Phys Commun 91:43–56

  5. Brogden KA (2005) Antimicrobial peptides: pore formers or metabolic inhibitors in bacteria? Nat Rev Microbiol 3:238

  6. Chan DI, Prenner EJ, Vogel HJ (2006) Tryptophan-and arginine-rich antimicrobial peptides: structures and mechanisms of action. Biochim Biophys Acta (BBA)-Biomembr 1758:1184–1202

  7. Daneshmand A, Kermanshahi H, Sekhavati MH, Javadmanesh A, Ahmadian M (2019) Antimicrobial peptide, cLF36, affects performance and intestinal morphology, microflora, junctional proteins, and immune cells in broilers challenged with E. coli. Sci Rep 9:1–9

  8. Essmann U, Perera L, Berkowitz ML, Darden T, Lee H, Pedersen LG (1995) A smooth particle mesh Ewald method. J Chem Phys 103:8577–8593

  9. Eswar N, Webb B, Marti-Renom MA, Madhusudhan M, Eramian D, Shen M, Pieper U, Sali A (2006) Comparative protein structure modeling using Modeller. Curr Protoc Bioinform 15(5.6):1

  10. Evans DJ, Holian B (1985) The nose–hoover thermostat. J Chem Phys 83:4069–4074

  11. Hartmann M, Berditsch M, Hawecker J, Ardakani MF, Gerthsen D, Ulrich AS (2010) Damage of the bacterial cell envelope by antimicrobial peptides gramicidin S and PGLa as revealed by transmission and scanning electron microscopy. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 54:3132–3142

  12. Hilpert K, McLeod B, Yu J, Elliott MR, Rautenbach M, Ruden S, Bürck J, Muhle-Goll C, Ulrich AS, Keller S (2010) Short cationic antimicrobial peptides interact with ATP. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 54:4480–4483

  13. Hu W, Lee K, Cross T (1993) Tryptophans in membrane proteins: indole ring orientations and functional implications in the gramicidin channel. Biochemistry 32:7035–7047

  14. Huguet C, Fietz S, Rosell-Melé A, Daura X, Costenaro L (2017) Molecular dynamics simulation study of the effect of glycerol dialkyl glycerol tetraether hydroxylation on membrane thermostability. Biochim Biophys Acta (BBA) Biomembr 1859:966–974

  15. Kollman PA, Massova I, Reyes C, Kuhn B, Huo S, Chong L, Lee M, Lee T, Duan Y, Wang W (2000) Calculating structures and free energies of complex molecules: combining molecular mechanics and continuum models. Acc Chem Res 33:889–897

  16. Kumari R, Kumar R, Consortium OSDD, Lynn A (2014) g_mmpbsaî*¸ A GROMACS tool for high-throughput MM-PBSA calculations. J Chem Inf Model 54:1951–1962

  17. Laskowski RA, MacArthur MW, Moss DS, Thornton JM (1993) PROCHECK: a program to check the stereochemical quality of protein structures. J Appl Crystallogr 26:283–291

  18. MacKerell AD Jr, Banavali N, Foloppe N (2000) Development and current status of the CHARMM force field for nucleic acids. Biopolymers 56:257–265

  19. Maupetit J, Derreumaux P, Tuffery P (2009) PEP-FOLD: an online resource for de novo peptide structure prediction. Nucleic Acids Res 37:W498–W503

  20. Nguyen LT, Haney EF, Vogel HJ (2011) The expanding scope of antimicrobial peptide structures and their modes of action. Trends Biotechnol 29:464–472

  21. Nicolas P (2009) Multifunctional host defense peptides: intracellular-targeting antimicrobial peptides. FEBS J 276:6483–6496

  22. Nosé S, Klein M (1983) Constant pressure molecular dynamics for molecular systems. Mol Phys 50:1055–1076

  23. Pandey B, Grover A, Sharma P (2018) Molecular dynamics simulations revealed structural differences among WRKY domain-DNA interaction in barley (Hordeum vulgare). BMC Genom 19:132

  24. Park CB, Kim HS, Kim SC (1998) Mechanism of action of the antimicrobial peptide buforin II: buforin II kills microorganisms by penetrating the cell membrane and inhibiting cellular functions. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 244:253–257

  25. Pirkhezranian Z, Tanhaeian A, Mirzaii M, Sekhavati MH (2019) Expression of Enterocin-P in HEK platform: evaluation of its cytotoxic effects on cancer cell lines and its potency to interact with cell-surface glycosaminoglycan by molecular modeling. Int J Pept Res Ther 19:1–10

  26. Reyes-Cortes R, Acosta-Smith E, Mondragón-Flores R, Nazmi K, Bolscher JG, Canizalez-Roman A, Leon-Sicairos N (2016) Antibacterial and cell penetrating effects of LFcin17–30, LFampin265–284, and LF chimera on enteroaggregative Escherichia coli. Biochem Cell Biol 95:76–81

  27. Straus SK, Hancock RE (2006) Mode of action of the new antibiotic for Gram-positive pathogens daptomycin: comparison with cationic antimicrobial peptides and lipopeptides. Biochim Biophys Acta (BBA) Biomembr 1758:1215–1223

  28. Strøm M, Stensen W, Svendsen J, Rekdal Ø (2001) Increased antibacterial activity of 15-residue murine lactoferricin derivatives. J Pept Res 57:127–139

  29. Strøm MB, Svendsen JS, Rekdal Ø (2000) Antibacterial activity of 15-residue lactoferricin derivatives. J Pept Res 56:265–274

  30. Tahmoorespur M, Azghandi M, Javadmanesh A, Meshkat Z, Sekhavati MH (2019) A novel chimeric anti-HCV peptide derived from camel lactoferrin and molecular level insight on its interaction with E2. Int J Pept Res Ther 19:1–13

  31. Tang Y-L, Shi Y-H, Zhao W, Hao G, Le G-W (2009) Interaction of MDpep9, a novel antimicrobial peptide from Chinese traditional edible larvae of housefly, with Escherichia coli genomic DNA. Food Chem 115:867–872

  32. Tanhaeian A, Ahmadi FS, Sekhavati MH, Mamarabadi M (2018) Expression and purification of the main component contained in camel milk and its antimicrobial activities against bacterial plant pathogens. Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins 10:787–793

  33. Tanhaeian A, Jaafari MR, Ahmadi FS, Vakili-Ghartavol R, Sekhavati MH (2019) Secretory expression of a chimeric peptide in Lactococcus lactis: assessment of its cytotoxic activity and a deep view on its interaction with cell-surface glycosaminoglycans by molecular modeling. Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins 11:1034–1041

  34. Tanhaiean A, Azghandi M, Razmyar J, Mohammadi E, Sekhavati MH (2018) Recombinant production of a chimeric antimicrobial peptide in E. coli and assessment of its activity against some avian clinically isolated pathogens. Microb Pathog 122:73–78

  35. Tanhaieian A, Sekhavati MH, Ahmadi FS, Mamarabadi M (2018) Heterologous expression of a broad-spectrum chimeric antimicrobial peptide in Lactococcus lactis: its safety and molecular modeling evaluation. Microb Pathog 125:51–59

  36. Uyterhoeven ET, Butler CH, Ko D, Elmore DE (2008) Investigating the nucleic acid interactions and antimicrobial mechanism of buforin II. FEBS Lett 582:1715–1718

  37. Van Der Spoel D, Lindahl E, Hess B, Groenhof G, Mark AE, Berendsen HJ (2005) GROMACS: fast, flexible, and free. J Comput Chem 26:1701–1718

  38. Wang S, Zeng X, Yang Q, Qiao S (2016) Antimicrobial peptides as potential alternatives to antibiotics in food animal industry. Int J Mol Sci 17:603

  39. Yan J, Wang K, Dang W, Chen R, Xie J, Zhang B, Song J, Wang R (2013) Two hits are better than one: membrane-active and DNA binding-related double-action mechanism of NK-18, a novel antimicrobial peptide derived from mammalian NK-lysin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 57:220–228

  40. Yeaman MR, Yount NY (2003) Mechanisms of antimicrobial peptide action and resistance. Pharmacol Rev 55:27–55

  41. Yount NY, Bayer AS, Xiong YQ, Yeaman MR (2006) Advances in antimicrobial peptide immunobiology. Pept Sci 84:435–458

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Xavier Daura and Sahar Roshanak for their contribution to manuscript preparation.

Funding

No funding was obtained for this study.

Author information

ZP carried out the project, performed bioinformatics analyses and finalized the manuscript. MT was the corresponding author and contributed to manuscript preparation. HM conceived the study and commented on the manuscript. MHS was the corresponding author and contributed to manuscript preparation.

Correspondence to Mojtaba Tahmoorespur or Mohammad Hadi Sekhavati.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 2644.8 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pirkhezranian, Z., Tahmoorespur, M., Monhemi, H. et al. Computational Peptide Engineering Approach for Selection the Best Engendered Camel Lactoferrin-Derive Peptide with Potency to Interact with DNA. Int J Pept Res Ther (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10989-019-10012-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Antimicrobial peptides
  • Camel lactoferrin
  • DNA
  • MD simulation