Determination of antimicrobial effect of protamine by transmission electron microscopy and SDS PAGE on Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates from diabetic foot infection

Document Type : Short Communication

Authors

1 Department of Pathobiology, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan

2 Department of Microbiology, University of Karachi, Karachi, Pakistan

3 Department of Microbiology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada,

4 PCSIR Laboratories Complex, Karachi, Pakistan

5 Departmet of Clinical Microbiology & Immunology, Dadabhoy Institute of Higher Education, Karachi, Pakistan

6 Institute of Food Science and Nutrition, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan

7 Islamic International University, Islamabad

Abstract

Objective(s): Diabetic foot infection is one of the major complications of diabetes leading to lower limb amputations. Isolation and identification of bacteria causing diabetic foot infection, determination of antibiotic resistance, antimicrobial potential of protamine by electron microscopy and SDS-PAGE analysis, arethe aims of this study.
Materials and Methods: 285 pus samples from diabetic foot infection patients were collected from different hospitals of Karachi and Capital Health Hospital, Halifax, Canada. Clinical history of each patient was recorded. Bacterial isolates were cultured on appropriate media; identification was done by morphology, cultural and biochemical tests. Effect of protamine against multi drug resistant strains of Pseudomona aeruginosa was checked by minimum inhibitory concentration in 96 well micro-titer plates. The isolates were grown in bactericidal concentration of protamine on plates to isolate mutants. Effect of protamine on protein expression was checked by SDS- PAGE and ultra-structural morphological changes by transmission electron microscopy.
Results: Results indicated prevalence of foot infection as 92% in diabetic patients. Major bacterial isolates were Staphylococcus aureus 65 (23%), P. aeruginosa 80 (28.1%), Klebsiella spp. 37 (13%), Proteus mirabilis 79 (27.7%), and Escherichia coli 24 (12%). These isolates were highly resistant to different antibiotics. MIC value of protamine was 500 µg/ml against P. aeruginosa. SDS-PAGE analysis revealed that protamine can suppress expression of various virulence proteins and electron micrographs indicated condensation of cytoplasm and accumulation of protamine in cytoplasm without damaging the cell membrane.
Conclusion: P. aeruginosa and S. aureus were the major isolates expressing multi-drug resistance and protamine sulfate represented good antimicrobial potential.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

1. Boulton, AJ. The diabetic foot: a global view. Diabetes/Metabolism Res. Rev 2000; 16(S1):S2-5.
2. Raja, NS. Microbiology of diabetic foot infections in a teaching hospital in Malaysia: a retrospective study of 194 cases. J. Microbiol Immunol Infect 2007;40:39.
3. Siripornmongcolchai, T, Chomvarin, C, Chaicumpar, K, Limpaiboon, T, Wongkhum, C. Evaluation of different primers for detecting mecA gene by PCR in comparison with phenotypic methods for discrimination of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. S. Asian J Trop Med Public Health. 2002;33:758-763.
4. Frieri, M, Kumar, K, Boutin, A. Antibiotic resistance. J. Infect Public Health. 2017; 10:369-378.
5. Haynes, A, Ruda, F, Oliver, J, Hamood, AN, Griswold, JA, Park, PW, Rumbaugh, KP, Syndecan, shedding contributes to Pseudomonas aeruginosa sepsis. Infect. Immunity 2005; 73:7914-7921.
6. Aspedon, A, Groisman, EA. The antibacterial action of protamine: evidence for disruption of cytoplasmic membrane energization in Salmonella typhimurium. Microbiol 1996; 142:3389-3397.
7. Gao, B, Stieger, B, Noé, B, Fritschy, JM, Meier, PJ. Localization of the organic anion transporting polypeptide 2 (Oatp2) in capillary endothelium and choroid plexus epithelium of rat brain. J. Histochem. Cytochem. 1999; 47:1255-1263
8. Matsuzaki, K, Yoneyama, S, Fujii, N, Miyajima, K, Yamada KI, Kirino Y, Anzai K. Membrane permeabilization mechanisms of a cyclic antimicrobial peptide, Tachyplesin I, and its linear analog. Biochem 1997; 36:9799-9806.
9. Wu, M, Maier, E, Benz, R, Hancock, RE. Mechanism of interaction of different classes of cationic antimicrobial peptides with planar bilayers and with the cytoplasmic membrane of Escherichia coli. Biochem 1999; 38:7235-7242.
10. Hancock, RE. Antibacterial peptides and the outer membranes of gram-negative bacilli. J Med Microbiol 1997; 46:1.
11. Hancock, RE. Peptide antibiotics. The Lancet 1997; 349:418-422.
12. Pink, DA, Hasan, FM, Quinn, BE, Winterhalter, M, Mohan, M, Gill, TA. Interaction of protamine with gram‐negative bacteria membranes: possible alternative mechanisms of internalization in Escherichia coli, Salmonella typhimurium and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J. Peptide Sci 2014; 20:240-250.
13. Pink D, Hansen LT, Gill T, Quinn B, Jericho M. Beveridge T. Divalent calcium ions inhibit the penetration of protamine through the polysaccharide brush of the outer membrane of Gram-negative bacteria. Langmuir 2003. 19: 8852-8858.
14. Hansen, LT, Gill, TA. Solubility and antimicrobial efficacy of protamine on Listeria monocytogenes and Escherichia coli as influenced by pH J Appl Microbiol 2000; 88:1049-1055.
15. Johansen, C, Verheul, A, Gram, L, Gill, T, Abee, T. Protamine-induced permeabilization of cell envelopes of gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria. Appl. Environ. Microbiol 1997; 63:1155-159.
16. Johansen, C, Gill, T, Gram, L. Changes in cell morphology of Listeria monocytogenes and Shewanella putrefaciens resulting from the action of protamine. Appl Environ Microbiol 1996; 62:1058-1064.
17. Johansen, C, Gill, T, Gram, L. Antibacterial effect of protamine assayed by impedimetry. J Appl Bacteriol 1995; 78:297-303.
18. Uyttendaele, M, Debevere, J. Evaluation of the antimicrobial activity of protamine. Food Microbiol 1994; 11:417-427.
19. Rosa-Fraile, M, Camacho-Muñoz, E, Rodríguez-Granger, J, Liébana-Martos, C. Specimen storage in transport medium and detection of group B Streptococci by culture. J Clin Microbiol 2005; 43:928-930.
20. Gadepalli, R, Dhawan, B, Sreenivas, V, Kapil, A, Ammini, AC, Chaudhry, RA. Clinico-Microbiological study of diabetic foot ulcers in an Indian tertiary care hospital. Diabetes Care 2006; 29:1727-1732.
21. Willcox, MD, Hume, EB, Aliwarga, Y, Kumar, N, Cole, N. A novel cationic‐peptide coating for the prevention of microbial colonization on contact lenses. J Appl Microbiol 2008;105:1817-1825.
22. Garduno, RA, Garduno, E, Hiltz, M, Hoffman, PS. Intracellular growth of Legionella pneumophila gives rise to a differentiated form dissimilar to stationary-phase forms. Infect. Immunity 2002; 70:6273-6283.    
23. Murugan, S, Mani, KR & Uma Devi P. Prevalence of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus among diabetes patients with foot ulcers and their antimicrobial susceptibility pattern. J Clin Diagn Res 2008;2:979-984.
24. Ozer, B, Kalaci, A, Semerci, E, Duran, N, Davul, S, Yanat, AN. Infections and aerobic bacterial pathogens in diabetic foot. Afr. J Microbiol Res 2010; 4:2153-2160.    
25. Khoharo, HK, Ansari, S, Qureshi, F. Diabetic foot ulcers; common isolated pathogens and in vitro antimicrobial activity. Profess. Med J Quart 2009;53-60.26.
26. Olid, AS, Solà I, Barajas‐Nava LA, Gianneo OD, Cosp XB and Lipsky BA, 2015. Systemic antibiotics for treating diabetic foot infections. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (9).
27. Pränting, M, Andersson, DI. Mechanisms and physiological effects of protamine resistance in Salmonella enterica serovar typhimurium LT2 J Antimicrob Chemother 2010; 65:876-887.
28. Koo, SP, Bayer, AS, Yeaman, MR. Diversity in antistaphylococcal mechanisms among membrane-targeting antimicrobial peptides. Infect. Immunity 2001; 69:4916-4922.
29. Soboh, F, Khoury, AE, Zamboni, AC, Davidson, D, Mittelman, MW. Effects of Ciprofloxacin and Protamine sulfate combinations against catheter-associated Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms. Antimicrob. agents Chemother 1995; 39:1281-1286.
30. Himly, M, Mills-Goodlet, R, Geppert, M, Duschl, A. Nanomaterials in the Context of Type 2 immune Responses—Fears and Potentials. Frontiers Immunol 2017; 8:471.
31. Schweizer, HP. Efflux as a mechanism of resistance to antimicrobials in Pseudomonas aeruginosa and related bacteria: unanswered questions. Genet Mol Res 2003; 2:48-62.
32. Sun, J, Deng, Z, Yan, A. Bacterial multidrug efflux pumps: mechanisms, physiology and pharmacological exploitations. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2014; 453:254-267.    
33. Mohan, M. Effects of Protamine on Pseudomonas aeruginosa cell envelope components: surface remodeling [M Sc dissertation]. Dalhousie University, Halifax Canada; 2010.
34. Broutin, I, Benabdelhak, H, Moreel, X, Lascombe, MB, Lerouge, D, Ducruix, A. Expression, purification, crystallization and preliminary X-ray studies of the outer membrane efflux proteins OprM and OprN from Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Acta Crystallograph Section F: Struct Biol Crystal Commun 2005; 61:315-318.
35. MacMillan, WG, Hibbitt, KG. The effect of antimicrobial proteins on the fine structure of Staphylococcus aureus. Microbiol 1969; 56:373-377.
36. Mahendran, KR, Kreir, M, Weingart, H, Fertig, N, Winterhalter, M. Permeation of antibiotics through Escherichia coli OmpF and OmpC porins: screening for influx on a single-molecule level. J Biomol Screening 2010; 15:302-307.
37. Danelon, C, Nestorovich, EM, Winterhalter, M, Ceccarelli, M, Bezrukov, SM. Interaction of zwitterionic penicillins with the OmpF channel facilitates their translocation. Biophys J 2006; 90:1617-1627.    
38. Aspedon, A, Groisman, EA. The antibacterial action of protamine: evidence for disruption of cytoplasmic membrane energization in Salmonella typhimurium. Microbiology 1996; 142:3389-3397.
Iranian Journal of Basic Medical Sciences
Volume 22, Issue 7
July 2019
Pages 827-832

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics