Advertisement

Probiotics and Antimicrobial Proteins

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 1370–1378 | Cite as

Study on Antiviral Activity of Two Recombinant Antimicrobial Peptides Against Tobacco Mosaic Virus

  • Mohammad Ali Sabokkhiz
  • Abbas Tanhaeian
  • Mojtaba MamarabadiEmail author
Article
  • 149 Downloads

Abstract

Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) are generally small peptides with less than 50 amino acid residues, which have been considered as the first line of defense system in plants and animals. These small cationic peptides belong to a family of antimicrobials that are multifunctional effectors of innate immunity. The direct antimicrobial activity of AMPs against different bacteria, viruses, fungi, and parasites has been confirmed in different studies. In this study, the antiviral activity of two recombinant AMPs named thanatin and lactoferricin+lactoferrampin was evaluated against Tobacco mosaic virus (TMV) using half-leaf and leaf disk methods under in vivo and in vitro condition, respectively. The obtained result indicated that both recombinant AMPs have shown an antiviral activity against TMV. Compared to the chimeric lactoferricin+lactoferrampin, recombinant thanatin showed a higher rate of antiviral activity against TMV. Three types of effects, including protective, curative, and inactivation, were evaluated during an antiviral activity test. In the present study, the antiviral activity of two recombinant AMPs is represented for the first time: thanatin and chimeric lactoferricin+lactoferrampin against TMV as a viral plant pathogen.

Keywords

Thanatin Lactoferricin Lactoferrampin TMV Plant viruses Disease control 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Dr. Mojtaba Hosseini for his helpful discussion during statistical analysis.

Funding

This study was funded by the Deputy of Research and Technology, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran (Grant No. 43239).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Mohammad Ali Sabokkhiz declares that he has no conflict of interest. Abbas Tanhaeian declares that he has no conflict of interest. Mojtaba Mamarabadi declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed Consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Supplementary material

12602_2019_9539_MOESM1_ESM.docx (192 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 192 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Agrios GN (2005) Plant pathology, 5th edn. Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hadidi A, Khetarpal RK, Koganezawa H (1998) Plant virus disease control. APS Press, MinnesotaGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fan H, Song B, Bhadury PS, Jin L, Hu D, Yang S (2011) Antiviral activity and mechanism of action of novel thiourea containing chiral phosphonate on tobacco mosaic virus. Int J Mol Sci 12:4522–4535.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms12074522 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ritzenthaler C (2005) Resistance to plant viruses: old issue, news answers? Curr Opin Biotechnol 16:118–122.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2005.02.009 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Scholthof KBG (2004) Tobacco mosaic virus: a model system for plant biology. Annu Rev Phytopathol 42:13–34.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.phyto.42.040803.140322 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Montesinos E (2007) Antimicrobial peptides and plant disease control. FEMS Microbiol Lett 270:1–11.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6968.2007.00683.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jung YJ, Kang KK (2014) Application of antimicrobial peptides for disease control in plants. Plant Breed Biotech 2:1–13.  https://doi.org/10.9787/PBB.2014.2.1.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sinha S, Zheng L, Mu Y, Ng WJ, Bhattacharjya S (2017) Structure and interactions of a host defense antimicrobial peptide thanatin in lipopolysaccharide micelles reveal mechanism of bacterial cell agglutination. Sci Rep 7:17795.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-18102-6 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mamarabadi M, Tanhaeian A, Ramezany Y (2018) Antifungal activity of recombinant thanatin in comparison with two plant extracts and a chemical mixture to control fungal plant pathogens. AMB Express 8(1):180.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13568-018-0710-4 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pagès JM, Dimarcq JL, Quenin S, Hetru C (2003) Thanatin activity on multidrug resistant clinical isolates of Enterobacter aerogenes and Klebsiella pneumoniae. Int J Antimicrob Agents 22:265–269.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-8579(03)00201-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schubert M, Houdelet M, Kogel KH, Fischer R, Schillberg S, Nölke G (2015) Thanatin confers partial resistance against aflatoxigenic fungi in maize (Zea mays). Transgenic Res 24:885–895.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11248-015-9888-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fehlbaum P, Bulet P, Chernysh S, Briand JP, Roussel JP, Letellier L, Hetru C, Hoffmann JA (1996) Structure-activity analysis of thanatin, a 21-residue inducible insect defense peptide with sequence homology to frog skin antimicrobial peptides. Proc Natl Acad Sci 93:1221–1225.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.93.3.1221 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Koch A, Khalifa W, Langen G, Vilcinskas A, Kogel K, Imani J (2012) The antimicrobial peptide thanatin reduces fungal infections in Arabidopsis. J Phytopathol 160:606–610.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0434.2012.01946.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Khan JA, Kumar P, Paramasivam M, Yadav RS, Sahani MS, Sharma S, Srinivasan A, Singh TP (2001) Camel lactoferrin, a transferrin-cum-lactoferrin: crystal structure of camel apolactoferrin at 2.6 Å resolution and structural basis of its dual role. J Mol Biol 309:751–761.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jmbi.2001.4692 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Baker EN, Baker HM, Kidd RD (2002) Lactoferrin and transferrin: functional variations on a common structural framework. Biochem Cell Biol 80:27–34.  https://doi.org/10.1139/o01-153 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Duran A, Ibrahim Kahve H (2017) The use of lactoferrin in food industry. Acad J Sci 07:89–94Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tanhaieian A, Sekhavati MH, Ahmadi FS, Mamarabadi M (2018) Heterologous expression of a broad-spectrum chimeric antimicrobial peptide in Lactococcus lactis: its safety and molecular modeling evaluation. Microb Pathog 1-8:51–59.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micpath.2018.09.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Abdelbacki AM, Taha SH, Sitohy MZ, Dawood AIA, Abd-El Hamid MM, Rezk AA (2010) Inhibition of tomato yellow leaf curl virus (TYLCV) using whey proteins. Virol J 7:26–31.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-422X-7-26 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wang J, Zhu YK, Wang HY, Zhang H, Wang KY (2012) Inhibitory effects of esterified whey protein fractions by inducing chemical defense against tobacco mosaic virus (TMV) in tobacco seedlings. Ind Crop Prod 37:207–212.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2011.11.023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wang J, Wang HY, Xia XM, Li PP, Wang KY (2013) Inhibitory effect of esterified lactoferin and lactoferin against tobacco mosaic virus (TMV) in tobacco seedlings. Pestic Biochem Physiol 105:62–68.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pestbp.2012.11.009 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Taha SH, Mokbel SA, Abdel-Hamid M, Hamed AH (2015) Antiviral activity of lactoferrin against potato virus X in vitro and in vivo. Science 10:86–94.  https://doi.org/10.3923/ijds.2015.86.94 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sinha M, Kaushik S, Kaur P, Sharma S, Singh TP (2013) Antimicrobial lactoferrin peptides: the hidden players in the protective function of a multifunctional protein. Int J Pept 2013:1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/390230 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bolscher JG, Adao R, Nazmi K, van den Keybus PA, van’t Hof W, Amerongen AVN, Bastos M Veerman EC (2009) Bactericidal activity of LF chimera is stronger and less sensitive to ionic strength than its constituent lactoferricin and lactoferrampin peptides. Biochimie 91:123–132.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biochi.2008.05.019 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tang XS, Tang ZR, Wang SP, Feng ZM, Zhou D, Li TJ, Yin YL (2012) Expression, purification, and antibacterial activity of bovine lactoferrampin–lactoferricin in Pichia pastoris. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 166:640–651.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12010-011-9455-0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tanhaeian A, Ahmadi FS, Sekhavati MH, Mamarabadi M (2018) Expression and purification of the main component contained in camel milk and its antimicrobial activities against bacterial plant pathogens. Probiotics Antimicro 10:1–7.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-018-9416-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Schägger H, Aquila H, Von Jagow G (1988) Coomassie blue-sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis for direct visualization of polypeptides during electrophoresis. Anal Biochem 173:201–205.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-2697(88)90179-0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kim YS, Hwang EI, O JH, Kim KS, Ryu MH, Yeo WH (2004) Inhibitory effects of Acinetobacter sp. KTB3 on infection of tobacco mosaic. Plant Pathol J 20:293–296.  https://doi.org/10.5423/PPJ.2004.20.4.293 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zhao L, Hao X, Wu Y (2015) Inhibitory effect of polysaccharide peptide (PSP) against tobacco mosaic virus (TMV). Int J Biol Macromol 75:474–478.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2015.01.058 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ball EM (1990) Agar double diffusion, plates (Ouchterlony): viruses. In: Hampton R, Ball E, DeBoer S (eds) Serological methods for detection and identification of viral and bacterial plant pathogens, a laboratory manual. APS Press, Minnesota, pp 111–120Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    SAS S (2002) 9.1 for Windows. SAS Institute Inc, Cary, North CarolinaGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Shah DM (1997) Genetic engineering for fungal and bacterial diseases. Curr Opin Biotechnol 8:208–214.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0958-1669(97)80104-8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Mourgues F, Brisset MN, Chevreau E (1998) Strategies to improve plant resistance to bacterial diseases through genetic engineering. Trends Biotechnol 16:203–210.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-7799(98)01189-5 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Donini M, Lico C, Baschieri S, Conti S, Magliani W, Polonelli L, Benvenuto E (2005) Production of an engineered killer peptide in Nicotiana benthamiana by using a potato virus X expression system. Appl Environ Microbiol 71:6360–6367.  https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.71.10.6360-6367.2005 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Palumbo JC, Horowitz AR, Prabhaker N (2001) Insecticidal control and resistance management for Bemisia tabaci. Crop Prot 20:739–765.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-2194(01)00117-X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Navot N, Pichersky E, Zeidan M, Zamir D, Czosnek H (1991) Tomato yellow leaf curl virus: a whitefly-transmitted geminivirus with a single genomic component. Virology 185:151–161.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0042-6822(91)90763-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Cahill M, Gorman K, Day S, Denholm I, Elbert A, Nauen R (1996) Baseline determination and detection of resistance to imidacloprid in Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Bull Entomol Res 86:343–349.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S000748530003491X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Elbert A, Nauen R (2000) Resistance of Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) to insecticides in southern Spain with special reference to neonicotinoids. Pest Manag Sci 56:60–64.  https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1526-4998(200001)56:1<60::AID-PS88>3.0.CO;2-K CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Li H, Ding X, Wang C, Ke H, Wu Z, Wang Y, Liu H, Guo J (2016) Control of tomato yellow leaf curl virus disease by Enterobacter asburiae BQ9 as a result of priming plant resistance in tomatoes. Turk J Biol 40:150–159.  https://doi.org/10.3906/biy-1502-12 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Brogden KA (2005) Antimicrobial peptides: pore formers or metabolic inhibitors in bacteria? Nat Rev Microbiol 3:238–250.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro1098 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Park SC, Park Y, Hahm KS (2011) The role of antimicrobial peptides in preventing multidrug-resistant bacterial infections and biofilm formation. Int J Mol Sci 12:5971–5992.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms12095971 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wakabayashi H, Hiratani T, Uchida K, Yamaguchi H (1996) Antifungal spectrum and fungicidal mechanism of an N-terminal peptide of bovine lactoferrin. J Infect Chemother 1:185–189.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02350646 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Yamauchi K, Tomita M, Giehl TJ, Ellison RT (1993) Antibacterial activity of lactoferrin and a pepsin-derived lactoferrin peptide fragment. Infect Immun 61:719–728PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Mygind PH, Fischer RL, Schnorr KM, Hansen MT, Sönksen CP, Ludvigsen S, Raventós D, Buskov S, Christensen B, De Maria L, Taboureau O (2005) Plectasin is a peptide antibiotic with therapeutic potential from a saprophytic fungus. Nature 437:975–980.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04051 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Marcos JF, Beachy RN, Houghten RA, Blondelle SE, Perez-Paya E (1995) Inhibition of a plant virus infection by analogs of melittin. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 92:12466–12469.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.92.26.12466 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Baghian A, Jaynes J, Enright F, Kousoulas KG (1997) An amphipathic α-helical synthetic peptide analogue of melittin inhibits herpes simplex virus-1 (HSV-1)-induced cell fusion and virus spread. Peptides 18:177–183.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0196-9781(96)00290-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Wachinger M, Kleinschmidt A, Winder D, von Pechmann N, Ludvigsen A, Neumann M, Holle R, Salmons B, Erfle V, Brack-Werner R (1998) Antimicrobial peptides melittin and cecropin inhibit replication of human immunodeficiency virus 1 by suppressing viral gene expression. J Gen Virol 79:731–740.  https://doi.org/10.1099/0022-1317-79-4-731 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Park JY, Yang SY, Kim YC, Kim JC, Le Dang Q, Kim JJ, Kim IS (2012) Antiviral peptide from Pseudomonas chlororaphis O6 against tobacco mosaic virus (TMV). J Korean Soc Appl Biol Chem 55:89–94.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13765-012-0015-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Whitham S, Dinesh-Kumar SP, Choi D, Hehl R, Corr C, Baker B (1994) The product of the tobacco mosaic virus resistance gene N: similarity to toll and the interleukin-1 receptor. Cell 78:1101–1115.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(94)90283-6 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Mestre P, Baulcombe DC (2006) Elicitor-mediated oligomerization of the tobacco N disease resistance protein. Plant Cell 18:491–501.  https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.105.037234 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohammad Ali Sabokkhiz
    • 1
  • Abbas Tanhaeian
    • 2
  • Mojtaba Mamarabadi
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of AgricultureFerdowsi University of MashhadMashhadIran
  2. 2.Department of Biotechnology and Plant Breeding, Faculty of AgricultureFerdowsi University of MashhadMashhadIran
  3. 3.Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of AgricultureFerdowsi University of MashhadMashhadIran

Personalised recommendations