30 research outputs found

    Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) nanomachines: mechanisms for fluoroquinolone and glycopeptide recognition, efflux and/or deactivation

    Get PDF
    In this review, we discuss mechanisms of resistance identified in bacterial agents Staphylococcus aureus and the enterococci towards two priority classes of antibiotics—the fluoroquinolones and the glycopeptides. Members of both classes interact with a number of components in the cells of these bacteria, so the cellular targets are also considered. Fluoroquinolone resistance mechanisms include efflux pumps (MepA, NorA, NorB, NorC, MdeA, LmrS or SdrM in S. aureus and EfmA or EfrAB in the enterococci) for removal of fluoroquinolone from the intracellular environment of bacterial cells and/or protection of the gyrase and topoisomerase IV target sites in Enterococcus faecalis by Qnr-like proteins. Expression of efflux systems is regulated by GntR-like (S. aureus NorG), MarR-like (MgrA, MepR) regulators or a two-component signal transduction system (TCS) (S. aureus ArlSR). Resistance to the glycopeptide antibiotic teicoplanin occurs via efflux regulated by the TcaR regulator in S. aureus. Resistance to vancomycin occurs through modification of the D-Ala-D-Ala target in the cell wall peptidoglycan and removal of high affinity precursors, or by target protection via cell wall thickening. Of the six Van resistance types (VanA-E, VanG), the VanA resistance type is considered in this review, including its regulation by the VanSR TCS. We describe the recent application of biophysical approaches such as the hydrodynamic technique of analytical ultracentrifugation and circular dichroism spectroscopy to identify the possible molecular effector of the VanS receptor that activates expression of the Van resistance genes; both approaches demonstrated that vancomycin interacts with VanS, suggesting that vancomycin itself (or vancomycin with an accessory factor) may be an effector of vancomycin resistance. With 16 and 19 proteins or protein complexes involved in fluoroquinolone and glycopeptide resistances, respectively, and the complexities of bacterial sensing mechanisms that trigger and regulate a wide variety of possible resistance mechanisms, we propose that these antimicrobial resistance mechanisms might be considered complex ‘nanomachines’ that drive survival of bacterial cells in antibiotic environments

    Solvent-Free Melting Techniques for the Preparation of Lipid-Based Solid Oral Formulations

    Get PDF

    Molecular structure of the ParM polymer and the mechanism leading to its nucleotide-driven dynamic instability

    No full text
    ParM is a prokaryotic actin homologue, which ensures even plasmid segregation before bacterial cell division. In vivo, ParM forms a labile filament bundle that is reminiscent of the more complex spindle formed by microtubules partitioning chromosomes in eukaryotic cells. However, little is known about the underlying structural mechanism of DNA segregation by ParM filaments and the accompanying dynamic instability. Our biochemical, TIRF microscopy and high-pressure SAX observations indicate that polymerization and disintegration of ParM filaments is driven by GTP rather than ATP and that ParM acts as a GTP-driven molecular switch similar to a G protein. Image analysis of electron micrographs reveals that the ParM filament is a left-handed helix, opposed to the right-handed actin polymer. Nevertheless, the intersubunit contacts are similar to those of actin. Our atomic model of the ParM-GMPPNP filament, which also fits well to X-ray fibre diffraction patterns from oriented gels, can explain why after nucleotide release, large conformational changes of the protomer lead to a breakage of intra- and interstrand interactions, and thus to the observed disintegration of the ParM filament after DNA segregation
    corecore