Comparative Properties of Helical and Linear Amphipathicity of Peptides Composed of Arginine, Tryptophan, and Valine.

BACKGROUND

The persistence of antibiotic resistance has incited a strong interest in the discovery of agents with novel antimicrobial mechanisms. The direct killing of multidrug-resistant bacteria by cationic antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) underscores their importance in the fight against infections associated with antibiotic resistance. Despite a vast body of AMP literature demonstrating a plurality in structural classes, AMP engineering has been largely skewed toward peptides with idealized amphipathic helices (H-amphipathic). In contrast to helical amphipathicity, we designed a series of peptides that display the amphipathic motifs in the primary structure. We previously developed a rational framework for designing AMP libraries of H-amphipathic peptides consisting of Arg, Trp, and Val (H-RWV, with a confirmed helicity up to 88% in the presence of membrane lipids) tested against the most common MDR organisms.

METHODS

In this study, we re-engineered one of the series of the H-RWV peptides (8, 10, 12, 14, and 16 residues in length) to display the amphipathicity in the primary structure by side-by-side (linear) alignment of the cationic and hydrophobic residues into the 2 separate linear amphipathic (L-amphipathic) motifs. We compared the 2 series of peptides for antibacterial activity, red blood cell (RBC) lysis, killing and membrane-perturbation properties.

RESULTS

The L-RWV peptides achieved the highest antibacterial activity at a minimum length of 12 residues (L-RWV12, minimum optimal length or MOL) with the lowest mean MIC of 3-4 µM, whereas the MOL for the H-RWV series was reached at 16 residues (H-RWV16). Overall, H-RWV16 displayed the lowest mean MIC at 2 µM but higher levels of RBC lysis (25-30%), while the L-RWV series displayed minor RBC lytic effects at the test concentrations. Interestingly, when the strain SA719 was chosen because of its susceptibility to most of the peptides, none of the L-RWV peptides demonstrated a high level of membrane perturbation determined by propidium iodide incorporation measured by flow cytometry, with <50% PI incorporation for the L-RWV peptides. By contrast, most H-RWV peptides displayed almost up to 100% PI incorporation. The results suggest that membrane perturbation is not the primary killing mechanism of the L-amphipathic RWV peptides, in contrast to the H-RWV peptides.

CONCLUSIONS

Taken together, the data indicate that both types of amphipathicity may provide different ideal pharmacological properties that deserve further investigation.