| Title |
Analysis of the antibacterial effect of an Edwardsiella tarda LuxS inhibitor
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40064-016-1733-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Boguang Sun, Min Zhang |
| Abstract |
LuxS/AI-2 quorum sensing is involved in the virulence of many bacterial pathogens, including the fish pathogen Edwardsiella tarda. In a previous study, we identified a small peptide, 5906, which inhibits E. tarda LuxS activity by binding specifically to LuxS in a manner that probably prevents the formation of functional LuxS homodimer. In the present study, using Japanese flounder as the experimental animal, we analyzed the antibacterial effect of 5906 produced by DH5α/p5906 (an Escherichia coli strain that produces 5906) and pID5906 (a mammalian plasmid that functional in flounder constitutively expresses 5906) against different bacterial fish pathogens. We found that fish administered with both DH5α/p5906 and pID5906 exhibited reduced bacterial recovery following E. tarda challenge. We also examined the effect of 5906 on the infection caused by another two fish pathogen, Aeromonas hydrophila and Vibrio harveyi. The results indicated that 5906 produced by DH5α/p5906 inhibited the AI-2 activity of A. hydrophila and V. harveyi, and that fish administered with DH5α/p5906 showed enhanced resistance against challenges with both bacteria. These results suggest that 5906 or its analogues/derivatives may be exploited for the development of broad-spectrum antibacterial agents applied in the prevention and control of fish bacterial diseases. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 9 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 23% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 12 | 55% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 February 2016.
All research outputs
#18,438,457
of 22,844,985 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#1,259
of 1,849 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#287,017
of 396,720 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#117
of 217 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,844,985 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,849 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 396,720 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 217 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.