Ezema Chinonso Anthony, Shibagaki Mitsuki, Kikukawa Takashi, Arai Tatsuya, Aizawa Tomoyasu
Graduate school of Life Science, Hokkaido University, Kita 10, Nishi 8, Kita-ku, Sapporo 060-0810, Japan.
Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Biological Sciences, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Enugu State 410001, Nigeria.
ACS Omega. 2025 May 22;10(21):21875-21888. doi: 10.1021/acsomega.5c01923. eCollection 2025 Jun 3.
Cathelicidin-DM and cathelicidin-BG are homologous and are expected to be similar in structure and biological activity. However, while all structural prediction tools tested showed cathelicidin-BG to be helical, there were mixed results for cathelicidin-DM, with most predicting it to contain three antiparallel β-sheets and no helices. Also, separate researchers, in nonidentical conditions, reported cathelicidin-BG to possess antimicrobial activity against only Gram-positive bacteria, unlike cathelicidin-DM, which affected both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, suggesting more dissimilarities between the peptides. We therefore decided to experimentally verify and compare the structures and activities of the peptides. Until now, there is no experimentally determined structural information on either peptide, and no cheap, efficient procedure has been reported for their mass production. We hereby report a recombinant method for cathelicidin-DM and cathelicidin-BG overexpression and purification, which yielded 1.19 and 1.92 mg of pure peptides, respectively, per 0.5 L of Luria-Bertani culture. At all oxidation states, both peptides adopted a random coil structure in sodium phosphate buffer (SPB) at pH 7.4, but switched to a helical conformation in membrane mimetics. In SPB, both native peptides demonstrated strong activity against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, with ≤5 μM of each peptide killing all cells of the tested bacterial strains, through membrane disruption as one of the possible mechanisms. We therefore conclude that, under the conditions studied, both cathelicidins have comparable structures and antimicrobial activities as their sequence homology suggested; and we recommend the use of laboratory experimentations for validation of structural prediction results.
Cathelicidin-DM和cathelicidin-BG是同源的,预计在结构和生物活性上相似。然而,虽然所有测试的结构预测工具都显示cathelicidin-BG呈螺旋状,但cathelicidin-DM的结果却参差不齐,大多数预测它含有三个反平行β折叠且无螺旋结构。此外,不同的研究人员在不同条件下报告称,cathelicidin-BG仅对革兰氏阳性菌具有抗菌活性,这与cathelicidin-DM不同,后者对革兰氏阳性菌和革兰氏阴性菌均有影响,这表明这两种肽之间存在更多差异。因此,我们决定通过实验来验证和比较这两种肽的结构和活性。到目前为止,还没有关于这两种肽的实验确定的结构信息,也没有报道过用于它们大规模生产的廉价、高效方法。我们在此报告一种用于cathelicidin-DM和cathelicidin-BG过表达和纯化的重组方法,每0.5 L的Luria-Bertani培养基分别产生1.19 mg和1.92 mg的纯肽。在所有氧化态下,两种肽在pH 7.4的磷酸钠缓冲液(SPB)中均呈无规卷曲结构,但在膜模拟物中转变为螺旋构象。在SPB中,两种天然肽对革兰氏阳性菌和革兰氏阴性菌均表现出强大的活性,每种肽浓度≤5 μM时就能杀死所有测试菌株的细胞,其中一种可能的机制是通过破坏细胞膜。因此,我们得出结论,在所研究的条件下,两种cathelicidin如它们的序列同源性所表明的那样具有可比的结构和抗菌活性;并且我们建议使用实验室实验来验证结构预测结果。