Interaction of humic acids and humic-acid-like polymers with herpes simplex virus type 1
Abstract
The study was performed in order to compare the antiviral activity against herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1) of synthetic humic-acid-like polymers to that of their low-molecular-weight basic compounds and naturally occurring humic acids (HA) in vitro. HA from peat water showed a moderate antiviral activity at a minimum effective concentration (MEC) of 20 µg/ml. HA-like polymers, i.e. the oxidation products of caffeic acid (KOP), hydrocaffeic acid (HYKOP), chlorogenic acid (CHOP), 3,4-dihydroxyphenylacetic acid (3,4-DHPOP), nordihydroguaretic acid (NOROP), gentisinic acid (GENOP), pyrogallol (PYROP) and gallic acid (GALOP), generally inhibit virus multiplication, although with different potency and selectivity. Of the substances tested, GENOP, KOP, 3,4-DHPOP and HYKOP with MEC values in the range of 2 to 10 µg/ml, proved to be the most potent HSV-1 inhibitors. Despite its lower antiviral potency (MEC 40 µg/ml), CHOP has a remarkable selectivity due to the high concentration of this polymer that is tolerated by the host cells (>640 µg/ml). As a rule, the antiviral activity of the synthetic compounds was restricted to the polymers and was not preformed in the low-molecular-weight basic compounds. This finding speaks in favour of the formation of antivirally active structures during the oxidative polymerization of phenolic compounds and, indirectly, of corresponding structural parts in different HA-type substances.
Keywords
Humic Acid Antiviral Activity Caffeic Acid Chlorogenic Acid Minimum Effective ConcentrationPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Schultz, H. Deutsche Tierärztliche Wochenschrift 69:613 (1962).Google Scholar
- 2.Klöcking, R. and M. Sprössig. Experientia 28:607 (1972).Google Scholar
- 3.Klöcking, R. and M. Sprössig. Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Mikrobiologie 15:25 (1975).Google Scholar
- 4.Thiel, K.-D., R. Klöcking, H. Schweizer and M. Sprössig. Zentralblatt für Bakteriologie I. Abteilung 239:304 (1977).Google Scholar
- 5.Klöcking, R., M. Sprössig, P. Wutzler, K.-D. Thiel and B. Helbig. Zeitschrift für Physiotherapie 33:95 (1983).Google Scholar
- 6.Klöcking, R., K.-D. Thiel and M. Sprössig. In: Peat and Peatlands in the Natural Environment Protection Vol. 1, pp. 446–455. Proc. 5th Int. Peat Congr. (Warszawa: WCIN, 1976).Google Scholar
- 7.Hampton, R.E. and R.W. Fulton. Virology 13:44 (1961).Google Scholar
- 8.Hampton, R.E. Phytopathology 60:1677 (1970).Google Scholar
- 9.Helbig, B. and R. Klöcking. Zeitschrift für Physiotherapie 33:31 (1983).Google Scholar
- 10.Hänninen, K.I., R. Klöcking and B. Helbig. Sci. Tot. Environ. 62:201 (1987).Google Scholar
- 11.Klöcking, R., B. Helbig, and P. Drabke. Pharmazie 32:297 (1977).Google Scholar
- 12.Vahery, A. and K. Cantell. Virology 21:661 (1963).Google Scholar
- 13.Voss, H., H. Sensch and P. Panse. Zentralblatt für Bakteriologie I. Abteilung 192:137 (1964).Google Scholar
- 14.Baba, M., R. Snoeck, R. Pauwels and E. De Clercq. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 32:1742 (1988).Google Scholar
- 15.Guttman-Bass, N. and J. Catalano-Sherman. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 49:1260 (1985).Google Scholar
- 16.Sobsey M.D. and A.R. Hickey. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 49:259 (1985).Google Scholar