Molprint 2D-Based Identification and Synthesis of Novel Chromene Based Small Molecules that Target Pla2: Validation through Chemo-And Bioinformatics Approaches

Phospholipase A2 (PLA2) is known to regulate inflammation and hence it is considered as a validated drug-target by medicinal chemists. In this report, we have identified and considered a highly ranked ligand from the ZINC-drug-like compounds database that targets PLA2 via the MOLPRINT-2D based chemoinformatics drug-design approach. The computationally predicted lead molecule was found to contain a core moiety of a chromene ring, which is well known for its varied biological properties. Here, a novel and efficient retro-synthetic protocol for the synthesis of highly substituted chromene libraries was made. A one-pot synthesis of chromene was carried out using different aromatic primary alcohols, malononitrile and 4-hydroxy coumarin in the presence of a mild oxidant mixture called T3P®–DMSO, followed by a Suzuki coupling reaction to obtain the lead molecules. All of the tested compounds of the chromene series displayed inhibition of the venom PLA2 in the range of 12 to 68 μM. Among the tested compounds, 2-amino-4-(2′-methyl-[1,1′-biphenyl]-4-yl)-5-oxo-4,5-dihydropyrano[3,2-c]chromene-3-carbonitrile (7b) showed maximum inhibitory efficacy against venom PLA2 with an IC50 value of 12.5 μM. Furthermore, the designed PLA2 ligands bound to the active site of venom PLA2, whose binding affinity was comparable to nimesulide, indicating that the chromene moiety containing ligands could be novel lead-structures that serve as anti-inflammatory agents

Simulation of spray drying of tomato juice using computational fluid dynamics (CFD)

The present study deals with the CFD simulations of the spray drying behavior of tomato juice and its quality. The selected tomatoes were red in color and uniform in size and shape. The TSS and lycopene content of tomato juice were 6.20% and 6.05 mg/100 g respectively. The proportion 60:40 of tomato juice and maltodextrin gave the best result in terms of minimum powder deposition on the drying chamber wall and maximum flavour retention in the final product. Three different inlet temperature (130, 140 and 150°C) were tested with three sets of feed rate (400, 600 and 800 ml/h). Standard k-ε turbulent model accurately predict the flow behaviour in the drying chamber at inlet air temperature 140°C and feed rate 600 ml/h. The moisture content and temperature profiles during spray drying of tomato pulp-maltodextrin mixture were continuously decreased as the distance from automizer increased. The addition of maltodextrin lowers the drying rate. A grid independency test has been carried out for a set of boundary conditions and optimum number of cell volumes was found to be 3.73 lakhs at 140°C. The quality characteristics of spray dried tomato powder were good in terms of color and other functional properties. Therefore, outcomes of the study will be helpful to setup process for production of good quality tomato powder

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy

In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy

In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field