The rumen microbiome: An underexplored resource for novel antimicrobial discovery

npj Biofilms and Microbiomes

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2017, Pages

  Oyama, Linda B ^a   Girdwood, Susan E ^a   Cookson, Alan R ^a   Fernandez Fuentes, Narcis ^a   Privé, Florence ^a   Vallin, Hannah E ^a   Wilkinson, Toby J ^a   Golyshin, Peter N ^b   Golyshina, Olga V ^b   Mikut, Ralf ^c   Hilpert, Kai ^d   Richards, Jennifer ^e   Wootton, Mandy ^e   Edwards, Joan E ^f   Maresca, Marc ^g   Perrier, Josette ^g   Lundy, Fionnuala T ^h   Luo, Yu ^h   Zhou, Mei ⁱ   Hess, Matthias ^j   Mantovani, Hilario C ^k   Creevey, Christopher J ^a   Huws, Sharon A ⁱ   more..

^a ABERYSTWYTH UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b BANGOR UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c KARLSRUHE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

^d ST GEORGE'S UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^e UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL OF WALES   (United Kingdom)

^f WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^g AIX MARSEILLE UNIVERSITÉ   (France)

^h QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

ⁱ QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

^j UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^k FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF VIÇOSA   (Brazil)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85042188179     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20555008     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/s41522-017-0042-1     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. WHO. The World Health Report - a Safer Future: Global Public Health Security in the 21st Century (World Health Organisation, Geneva 2007).
2. WHO. World Health Statistics (World health Organization, Geneva, 2014).
3. Prestinaci, F., Pezzotti, P. & Pantosti, A. Antimicrobial resistance: a global multifaceted phenomenon. Pathog. Glob. Health 109, 309-318 (2015).
4. Czaplewski, L. et al. Alternatives to antibiotics-a pipeline portfolio review. Lancet Infect. Dis. 16, 239-251 (2016).
5. Hibbing, M. E., Fuqua, C., Parsek, M. R. & Peterson, S. B. Bacterial competition: surviving and thriving in the microbial jungle. Nat. Rev. Micro 8, 15-25 (2010).
6. McCann, J. C., Wickersham, T. A. & Loor, J. J. High-throughput methods redefine the rumen microbiome and its relationship with nutrition and metabolism. Bioinform. Biol. Insights 8, 109-125 (2014).
7. Morgavi, D. P., Kelly, W. J., Janssen, P. H. & Attwood, G. T. Rumen microbial (meta)genomics and its application to ruminant production. Animal 7, 184-201 (2013).
8. Kalmokoff, M. L., Cyr, T. D., Hefford, M. A., Whitford, M. F. & Teather, R. M. Butyrivibriocin AR10, a new cyclic bacteriocin produced by the ruminal anaerobe Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens AR10: characterization of the gene and peptide. Can. J. Microbiol. 49, 763-773 (2003).
9. Meyerholz, D. K. & Ackermann, M. R. Antimicrobial peptides and surfactant proteins in ruminant respiratory tract disease. Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. 108, 91-96 (2005).
10. Russell, J. B. & Mantovani, H. C. The bacteriocins of ruminal bacteria and their potential as an alternative to antibiotics. J. Mol. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 4, 347-355 (2002).
11. Ardvidson, S. Extracellular Enzymes. In Gram-positive Pathogens (ed Novick, R.) 478-485 (ASM Press, Washington, 2006).
12. Lee, C. Y. & Lee., J. C. Staphylococcal capsules. In Gram-positive Pathogens (eds Fischetti, V. A. et al.) 456-463. (American Society for Microbiology (ASM), Washington DC., 2006).
13. Handelsman, J. Metagenomics: application of genomics to uncultured microorganisms. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 68, 669-685 (2004).
14. Ferrer, M. et al. Novel hydrolase diversity retrieved from a metagenome library of bovine rumen microflora. Environ. Microbiol. 7, 1996-2010 (2005).
15. Prive, F. et al. Isolation and characterization of novel lipases/esterases from a bovine rumen metagenome. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 99, 5475-5485 (2015).
16. Hilpert, K., Winkler, D. F. H. & Hancock, R. E. W. Peptide arrays on cellulose support: SPOT synthesis, a time and cost efficient method for synthesis of large numbers of peptides in a parallel and addressable fashion. Nat. Protoc. 2, 1333-1349 (2007).
17. Maupetit, J., Derreumaux, P. & Tuffery, P. PEP-FOLD: an online resource for de novo peptide structure prediction. Nucleic Acids Res. 37, W498-W503 (2009).
18. Waghu, F. H. et al. CAMP: collection of sequences and structures of antimicrobial peptides. Nucleic Acids Res. 42, D1154-D1158 (2014).
19. Gough, M., Hancock, R. E. & Kelly, N. M. Antiendotoxin activity of cationic peptide antimicrobial agents. Infect. Immun. 64, 4922-4927 (1996).
20. Piers, K. L., Brown, M. H. & Hancock, R. E. Improvement of outer membrane-permeabilizing and lipopolysaccharide-binding activities of an antimicrobial cationic peptide by C-terminal modification. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 38, 2311-2316 (1994).
21. Alder, J. & Eisenstein, B. The advantage of bactericidal drugs in the treatment of infection. Curr. Infect. Dis. Rep. 6, 251-253 (2004).
22. Drago, L. et al. Activity of levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin against urinary pathogens. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 48, 37-45 (2001).
23. Ling, L. L. et al. A new antibiotic kills pathogens without detectable resistance. Nature 517, 455-459 (2015).
24. Gisby, J. & Bryant, J. Efficacy of a new cream formulation of mupirocin: comparison with oral and topical agents in experimental skin infections. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 44, 255-260 (2000).
25. Andes, D. & Craig, W. A. Pharmacodynamics of the new fluoroquinolone gatifloxacin in murine thigh and lung infection models. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 46, 1665-1670 (2002).
26. Nguyen, L. T. et al. Serum stabilities of short tryptophan- and arginine-rich antimicrobial peptide analogs. PLoS One. 5, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0012684 (2010).
27. Hall, T. A. BioEdit: a user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis program for Windows 95/98/NT. Nucleic Acids Symp. Ser. 41, 95-98 (1999).
28. Wheeler, D. L. et al. Database resources of the National Center for Biotechnology. Nucleic Acids Res. 31, 28-33 (2003).
29. Wang, Z. & Wang, G. APD: the antimicrobial peptide database. Nucleic Acids Res. 32, D590-D592 (2004).
30. Torrent, M. et al. AMPA: an automated web server for prediction of protein antimicrobial regions. Bioinformatics 28, 130-131 (2012).
31. Hammami, R., Zouhir, A., Ben Hamida, J. & Fliss, I. BACTIBASE: a new web-accessible database for bacteriocin characterization. BMC Microbiol. 7, 89 (2007).
32. Waghu, F. H., Barai, R. S., Gurung, P. & Idicula-Thomas, S. CAMPR3: a database on sequences, structures and signatures of antimicrobial peptides. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, D1094-D1097 (2016).
33. Lata, S., Sharma, B. K. & Raghava, G. P. Analysis and prediction of antibacterial peptides. BMC Bioinformatics 8, 263 (2007).
34. Hilpert, K. & Hancock, R. E. Use of luminescent bacteria for rapid screening and characterization of short cationic antimicrobial peptides synthesized on cellulose using peptide array technology. Nat. Protoc. 2, 1652-1660 (2007).
35. Mikut, R. Computer-based analysis, visualization, and interpretation of antimicrobial peptide activities. Methods Mol. Biol. 618, 287-299 (2010).
36. Wiegand, I., Hilpert, K. & Hancock, R. E. Agar and broth dilution methods to determine the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) of antimicrobial substances. Nat. Protoc. 3, 163-175 (2008).
37. Jorgensen, J. H. Development of global standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing: the ISO initiative. Clin. Microbiol. Newsl. 28, 153-157 (2006).
38. Andrews, J. M. Determination of minimum inhibitory concentrations. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 48, 5-16 (2001).
39. Oliva, B. et al. Biological properties of novel antistaphylococcal quinoline-indole agents. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 47, 458-466 (2003).
40. Friedman, L., Alder, J. D. & Silverman, J. A. Genetic changes that correlate with reduced susceptibility to daptomycin in staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 50, 2137-2145 (2006).
41. Ahmed, S. A., Gogal, R. M. Jr. & Walsh, J. E. A new rapid and simple non-radioactive assay to monitor and determine the proliferation of lymphocytes: an alternative to [3H]thymidine incorporation assay. J. Immunol. Methods 170, 211-224 (1994).
42. Boyd, M. R. in Anticancer Drug Development Guide: Preclinical Screening, Clinical Trials, and Approval (ed Teicher, B. A.) pp. 23-42 (Humana Press, Totowa, New Jersey, 1997).
43. Di Pasquale, E. et al. Biophysical studies of the interaction of squalamine and other cationic amphiphilic molecules with bacterial and eukaryotic membranes: importance of the distribution coefficient in membrane selectivity. Chem. Phys. Lipids 163, 131-140 (2010).
44. Mahfoud, R. et al. pH-dependent interaction of fumonisin B1 with cholesterol: physicochemical and molecular modeling studies at the air-water interface. J. Agric. Food Chem. 50, 327-331 (2002).
45. Dennison, S. R., Kim, Y. S., Cha, H. J. & Phoenix, D. A. Investigations into the ability of the peptide, HAL18, to interact with bacterial membranes. Eur. Biophys. J. 38, 37 (2008).
46. McCrudden, M. T. C. et al. The host defence peptide LL-37 is susceptible to proteolytic degradation by wound fluid isolated from foot ulcers of diabetic patients. Int. J. Pept. Res. Ther. 20, 457-464 (2014).
47. Maupetit, J., Tuffery, P. & Derreumaux, P. A coarse-grained protein force field for folding and structure prediction. Proteins Struct. Funct. Bioinformatics. 69, 394-408 (2007).
48. Schrödinger, L. L. C. (The PyMOL Molecular Graphics System, Version 1.7.6, 2010).
49. Huws, S. A. et al. Successional colonization of perennial ryegrass by rumen bacteria. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 56, 186-196 (2013).
50. Hu, F. et al. Antimicrobial activity and safety evaluation of peptides isolated from the hemoglobin of chickens. BMC Microbiol. 16, 287 (2016).