Brudzynski Katrina, Sjaarda Calvin
Bee-Biomedicals Inc., Drug Discovery and Development Department, St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada.
PLoS One. 2014 Sep 5;9(9):e106967. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0106967. eCollection 2014.
Honeys show a desirable broad spectrum activity against Gram-positive and negative bacteria making antibacterial activity an intrinsic property of honey and a desirable source for new drug development. The cellular targets and underlying mechanism of action of honey antibacterial compounds remain largely unknown. To facilitate the target discovery, we employed a method of phenotypic profiling by directly comparing morphological changes in Escherichia coli induced by honeys to that of ampicillin, the cell wall-active β-lactam of known mechanism of action. Firstly, we demonstrated the purity of tested honeys from potential β-lactam contaminations using quantitative LC-ESI-MS. Exposure of log-phase E. coli to honey or ampicillin resulted in time- and concentration-dependent changes in bacterial cell shape with the appearance of filamentous phenotypes at sub-inhibitory concentrations and spheroplasts at the MBC. Cell wall destruction by both agents, clearly visible on microscopic micrographs, was accompanied by increased permeability of the lipopolysaccharide outer membrane as indicated by fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS). More than 90% E. coli exposed to honey or ampicillin became permeable to propidium iodide. Consistently with the FACS results, both honey-treated and ampicillin-treated E. coli cells released lipopolysaccharide endotoxins at comparable levels, which were significantly higher than controls (p<0.0001). E. coli cells transformed with the ampicillin-resistance gene (β-lactamase) remained sensitive to honey, displayed the same level of cytotoxicity, cell shape changes and endotoxin release as ampicillin-sensitive cells. As expected, β-lactamase protected the host cell from antibacterial action of ampicillin. Thus, both honey and ampicillin induced similar structural changes to the cell wall and LPS and that this ability underlies antibacterial activities of both agents. Since the cell wall is critical for cell growth and survival, honey active compounds would be highly applicable for therapeutic purposes while differences in the mode of action between honey and ampicillin may provide clinical advantage in eradicating β-lactam-resistant pathogens.
蜂蜜对革兰氏阳性菌和阴性菌均表现出理想的广谱活性,这使得抗菌活性成为蜂蜜的固有特性,也是新药开发的理想来源。蜂蜜抗菌化合物的细胞靶点和潜在作用机制在很大程度上仍不为人知。为了便于发现靶点,我们采用了一种表型分析方法,即将蜂蜜诱导的大肠杆菌形态变化与氨苄青霉素(一种作用机制已知的细胞壁活性β-内酰胺类抗生素)诱导的形态变化直接进行比较。首先,我们使用定量液相色谱-电喷雾电离质谱法证明了测试蜂蜜中不存在潜在的β-内酰胺类污染物。对数期大肠杆菌暴露于蜂蜜或氨苄青霉素后,细菌细胞形态会随时间和浓度发生变化,在亚抑菌浓度下会出现丝状表型,在最低杀菌浓度下会出现原生质球。两种药物对细胞壁的破坏在显微镜图像上清晰可见,同时荧光激活细胞分选(FACS)显示脂多糖外膜的通透性增加。超过90%暴露于蜂蜜或氨苄青霉素的大肠杆菌对碘化丙啶变得通透。与FACS结果一致,经蜂蜜处理和经氨苄青霉素处理的大肠杆菌细胞释放的脂多糖内毒素水平相当,且均显著高于对照组(p<0.0001)。用氨苄青霉素抗性基因(β-内酰胺酶)转化的大肠杆菌细胞对蜂蜜仍敏感,表现出与氨苄青霉素敏感细胞相同水平的细胞毒性、细胞形态变化和内毒素释放。正如预期的那样,β-内酰胺酶保护宿主细胞免受氨苄青霉素的抗菌作用。因此,蜂蜜和氨苄青霉素对细胞壁和脂多糖诱导了相似的结构变化,而这种能力是两种药物抗菌活性的基础。由于细胞壁对细胞生长和存活至关重要,蜂蜜中的活性化合物在治疗方面具有很高的应用价值,而蜂蜜和氨苄青霉素作用方式的差异可能在根除β-内酰胺抗性病原体方面具有临床优势。