Suppr超能文献

鼓腹咝蝰、埃及眼镜蛇和红射毒眼镜蛇毒液的抗菌活性

Antibacterial Activity of Venom from the Puff Adder (), Egyptian Cobra (), and Red Spitting Cobra ().

作者信息

Okumu Mitchel Otieno, Eyaan Kennedy Lojau, Bett Luke Kipkorir, Gitahi Nduhiu

机构信息

Department of Public Health, Pharmacology and Toxicology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Nairobi, P.O. Box 29053-00625, Nairobi, Kenya.

Department of Health, County Government of Kisumu, P.O. Box 2738-40100, Kisumu, Kenya.

出版信息

Int J Microbiol. 2023 Mar 2;2023:7924853. doi: 10.1155/2023/7924853. eCollection 2023.

Abstract

(Puff adder), (Egyptian cobra), and (Red spitting cobra) venoms were tested for antimicrobial activity. This evaluation employed disc diffusion and microbroth dilution techniques. Gram-positive bacteria ( and ) and Gram-negative bacteria (, , and ) were used. Aztreonam (30 g), cefpodoxime (10 g), cefoxitine (30 g), streptomycin (25 g), ceftriaxone (30 g), nalidixic acid (30 g), tetracycline (30 g), and sulfamethoxazole (25 g) were used as controls. All tests were conducted in triplicate ( = 3). . The activity of venom against Gram-negative bacteria was significantly lower ( < 0.001) than that of controls. The efficacy of venom and sulfamethoxazole against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria was not significantly different ( > 0.9999). The efficacy of venom against Gram-positive bacteria was significantly lower ( < 0.001) than cefoxitin, streptomycin, and tetracycline. The efficacy of venom against Gram-negative bacteria was significantly lower ( < 0.001) than that of controls. There was no significant difference in the antimicrobial efficacy of venom and controls against Gram-positive bacteria (=0.3927 to =0.9998). There was no significant difference in the efficacy of venom and controls against Gram-negative bacteria (=0.3061 to =0.9981). There was no significant difference in the efficacy of venom and controls against Gram-positive bacteria (=0.2368 to > 0.9999). . Of all the tested venoms, only venom showed good efficacy against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria.

摘要

对鼓腹咝蝰、埃及眼镜蛇和红射毒眼镜蛇的毒液进行了抗菌活性测试。该评估采用了纸片扩散法和微量肉汤稀释技术。使用了革兰氏阳性菌(金黄色葡萄球菌和枯草芽孢杆菌)和革兰氏阴性菌(大肠杆菌、肺炎克雷伯菌和铜绿假单胞菌)。氨曲南(30μg)、头孢泊肟(10μg)、头孢西丁(30μg)、链霉素(25μg)、头孢曲松(30μg)、萘啶酸(30μg)、四环素(30μg)和磺胺甲恶唑(25μg)用作对照。所有测试均重复进行三次(n = 3)。鼓腹咝蝰毒液对革兰氏阴性菌的活性显著低于对照(P < 0.001)。埃及眼镜蛇毒液和磺胺甲恶唑对革兰氏阳性菌和革兰氏阴性菌的疗效无显著差异(P > 0.9999)。红射毒眼镜蛇毒液对革兰氏阳性菌的疗效显著低于头孢西丁、链霉素和四环素(P < 0.001)。红射毒眼镜蛇毒液对革兰氏阴性菌的活性显著低于对照(P < 0.001)。鼓腹咝蝰毒液与对照对革兰氏阳性菌的抗菌疗效无显著差异(P = 0.3927至P = 0.9998)。埃及眼镜蛇毒液与对照对革兰氏阴性菌的疗效无显著差异(P = 0.3061至P = 0.9981)。红射毒眼镜蛇毒液与对照对革兰氏阳性菌的疗效无显著差异(P = 0.2368至P > 0.9999)。在所有测试的毒液中,只有埃及眼镜蛇毒液对革兰氏阳性菌和革兰氏阴性菌均显示出良好的疗效。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5be4/9998156/494cd815baf4/IJMICRO2023-7924853.001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验