Application of Synthetic Molecular Evolution to the Discovery of Antimicrobial Peptides

  • William C. WimleyEmail author
Part of the Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology book series (AEMB, volume 1117)


Despite long-standing promise and many known examples, antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) have failed, with few exceptions, to significantly impact human medicine. Impediments to the systemic activity of AMPs include proteolysis, host cell interactions, and serum protein binding, factors that are not often considered in the early stages of AMP development. Here we discuss how synthetic molecular evolution, iterative cycles of library design, and physiologically relevant screening can be used to evolve AMPs that do not have these impediments.


  1. Agawa Y et al (1991) Interaction with phospholipid bilayers, ion channel formation, and antimicrobial activity of basic amphipathic a-helical model peptides of various chain lengths. J Biol Chem 266:20218–20222PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Arias CA, Murray BE (2009) Antibiotic-resistant bugs in the 21st century – a clinical super-challenge. N Engl J Med 360:439–443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boucher HW et al (2009) Bad bugs, no drugs: no ESKAPE! An update from the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 48:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Centers For Disease Control (2014) Antibiotic resistance threats in the United States, 2013.
  5. Chen CL, Strop P, Lebl M, Lam KS (1996) One bead-one compound combinatorial peptide library: different types of screening. Methods Enzymol 267:211–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. de Breij A et al (2018) The antimicrobial peptide SAAP-148 combats drug-resistant bacteria and biofilms. Sci Transl Med 10(423):eaan4044Google Scholar
  7. Deuss PJ, Arzumanov A, Williams DL, Gait MJ (2013) Parallel synthesis and splicing redirection activity of cell-penetrating peptide conjugate libraries of a PNA cargo. Org Biomol Chem 11:7621–7630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dobson AJ, Purves J, Kamysz W, Rolff J (2013) Comparing selection on S. aureus between antimicrobial peptides and common antibiotics. PLoS One 8:e76521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dooley CT et al (1994) An all D-amino acid opioid peptide with central analgesic activity from a combinatorial library. Science 266:2019–2022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Easton DM, Nijnik A, Mayer ML, Hancock RE (2009) Potential of immunomodulatory host defense peptides as novel anti-infectives. Trends Biotechnol 27:582–590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fedders H, Podschun R, Leippe M (2010) The antimicrobial peptide Ci-MAM-A24 is highly active against multidrug-resistant and anaerobic bacteria pathogenic for humans. Int J Antimicrob Agents 36:264–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fjell CD, Hancock RE, Cherkasov A (2007) AMPer: a database and an automated discovery tool for antimicrobial peptides. Bioinformatics 23:1148–1155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fox JL (2013) Antimicrobial peptides stage a comeback. Nat Biotechnol 31:379–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Frank R (2002) The SPOT-synthesis technique. synthetic peptide arrays on membrane supports – principles and applications. J Immunol Methods 267:13–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gordon YJ, Romanowski EG, McDermott AM (2005) A review of antimicrobial peptides and their therapeutic potential as anti-infective drugs. Curr Eye Res 30:505–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hamill P, Brown K, Jenssen H, Hancock RE (2008) Novel anti-infectives: is host defence the answer? Curr Opin Biotechnol 19:628–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. He L, Hoffmann AR, Serrano C, Hristova K, Wimley WC (2011) High-throughput selection of transmembrane sequences that enhance receptor tyrosine kinase activation. J Mol Biol 412:43–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. He J et al (2013) Direct cytosolic delivery of polar cargo to cells by spontaneous membrane-translocating peptides. J Biol Chem 288:29974–29986CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hilpert K, Volkmer-Engert R, Walter T, Hancock RE (2005) High-throughput generation of small antibacterial peptides with improved activity. Nat Biotechnol 23:1008–1012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Humet M et al (2003) A positional scanning combinatorial library of peptoids as a source of biological active molecules: identification of antimicrobials. J Comb Chem 5:597–605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Joly V, Jidar K, Tatay M, Yeni P (2010) Enfuvirtide: from basic investigations to current clinical use. Expert Opin Pharmacother 11:2701–2713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kauffman WB, Guha S, Wimley WC (2018) Synthetic molecular evolution of hybrid cell penetrating peptides. Nat Commun 9:2568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kazemzadeh-Narbat M et al (2010) Antimicrobial peptides on calcium phosphate-coated titanium for the prevention of implant-associated infections. Biomaterials 31:9519–9526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Krauson AJ, He J, Wimley WC (2012) Gain-of-function analogues of the pore-forming peptide melittin selected by orthogonal high-throughput screening. J Am Chem Soc 134:12732–12741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Krauson AJ, He J, Hoffmann AR, Wimley AW, Wimley WC (2013) Synthetic molecular evolution of pore-forming peptides by iterative combinatorial library screening. ACS Chem Biol 8:823–831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Krauson AJ et al (2015) Conformational fine-tuning of pore-forming peptide potency and selectivity. J Am Chem Soc 137:16144–16152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kulagina NV, Shaffer KM, Anderson GP, Ligler FS, Taitt CR (2006) Antimicrobial peptide-based array for Escherichia coli and Salmonella screening. Anal Chim Acta 575:9–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kulagina NV, Shaffer KM, Ligler FS, Taitt CR (2007) Antimicrobial peptides as new recognition molecules for screening challenging species. Sensors Actuators B Chem 121:150–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. LaBonte J, Lebbos J, Kirkpatrick P (2003) Enfuvirtide. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2:345–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lam KS et al (1991) A new type of synthetic peptide library for identifying ligand-binding activity. Nature (London) 354:82–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Li S et al (2018) Potent macromolecule-sized poration of lipid bilayers by the Macrolittins, a synthetically evolved family of pore-forming peptides. J Am Chem Soc 140:6441–6447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Marks JR, Placone J, Hristova K, Wimley WC (2011) Spontaneous membrane-translocating peptides by orthogonal high-throughput screening. J Am Chem Soc 133:8995–9004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mechkarska M et al (2013) An analog of the host-defense peptide hymenochirin-1B with potent broad-spectrum activity against multidrug-resistant bacteria and immunomodulatory properties. Peptides 50:153–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Molhoek EM, van Dijk A, Veldhuizen EJ, Haagsman HP, Bikker FJ (2011) Improved proteolytic stability of chicken cathelicidin-2 derived peptides by D-amino acid substitutions and cyclization. Peptides 32:875–880CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Moy TI et al (2009) High-throughput screen for novel antimicrobials using a whole animal infection model. ACS Chem Biol 4:527–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nguyen LT et al (2010) Serum stabilities of short tryptophan- and arginine-rich antimicrobial peptide analogs. PLoS One 5:e12684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Okada M, Natori S (1983) Purification and characterization of an antibacterial protein from haemolymph of Sarcophaga peregrina (flesh-fly) larvae. Biochem J 211:727–734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Otto M (2012) MRSA virulence and spread. Cell Microbiol 14:1513–1521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Park SC et al (2011) Synthetic diastereomeric-antimicrobial peptide: antibacterial activity against multiple drug-resistant clinical isolates. Biopolymers 96:130–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Patterson-Delafield J, Szklarek D, Martinez RJ, Lehrer RI (1981) Microbicidal cationic proteins of rabbit alveolar macrophages: amino acid composition and functional attributes. Infect Immun 31:723–731PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. Perron GG, Zasloff M, Bell G (2006) Experimental evolution of resistance to an antimicrobial peptide. Proc Biol Sci 273:251–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Peschel A (2002) How do bacteria resist human antimicrobial peptides? Trends Microbiol 10:179–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Peschel A, Sahl HG (2006) The co-evolution of host cationic antimicrobial peptides and microbial resistance. Nat Rev Microbiol 4:529–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pollard JE et al (2012) In vitro evaluation of the potential for resistance development to ceragenin CSA-13. J Antimicrob Chemother 67:2665–2672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Poveda E, Briz V, Soriano V (2005) Enfuvirtide, the first fusion inhibitor to treat HIV infection. AIDS Rev 7:139–147PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Qureshi NM, Coy DH, Garry RF, Henderson LA (1990) Characterization of a putative cellular receptor for HIV-1 transmembrane glycoprotein using synthetic peptides. AIDS 4:553–558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rapaport D, Ovadia M, Shai Y (1995) A synthetic peptide corresponding to a conserved heptad repeat domain is a potent inhibitor of Sendai virus-cell fusion: an emerging similarity with functional domains of other viruses. EMBO J 14:5524–5531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Rathinakumar R, Wimley WC (2008) Biomolecular engineering by combinatorial design and high-throughput screening: small, soluble peptides that permeabilize membranes. J Am Chem Soc 130:9849–9858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Rathinakumar R, Wimley WC (2010) High-throughput discovery of broad-spectrum peptide antibiotics. FASEB J 24:3232–3238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rathinakumar R, Walkenhorst WF, Wimley WC (2009) Broad-spectrum antimicrobial peptides by rational combinatorial design and high-throughput screening: the importance of interfacial activity. J Am Chem Soc 131:7609–7617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rausch JM, Marks JR, Wimley WC (2005) Rational combinatorial design of pore-forming beta-sheet peptides. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102:10511–10515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Riedl S, Zweytick D, Lohner K (2011a) Membrane-active host defense peptides – challenges and perspectives for the development of novel anticancer drugs. Chem Phys Lipids 164:766–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Riedl S et al (2011b) In search of a novel target – phosphatidylserine exposed by non-apoptotic tumor cells and metastases of malignancies with poor treatment efficacy. Biochim Biophys Acta 1808:2638–2645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Savini F et al (2017) Cell-density dependence of host-defense peptide activity and selectivity in the presence of host cells. ACS Chem Biol 12:52–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Savini F, Bobone S, Roversi D, Mangoni M, Stella L (2018) From liposomes to cells: filling the gap between physicochemical and microbiological studies of the activity and selectivity of host-defense peptides. Pept Sci 110:e24041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Schlusselhuber M et al (2014) In vitro effectiveness of the antimicrobial peptide eCATH1 against antibiotic-resistant bacterial pathogens of horses. FEMS Microbiol Lett 350:216–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Selsted ME, Brown DM, DeLange RJ, Harwig SSL, Lehrer RI (1985) Primary structures of six antimicrobial peptides of rabbit peritoneal neutrophils. J Biol Chem 260:4579–4584Google Scholar
  58. Starr CG, Wimley WC (2017) Antimicrobial peptides are degraded by the cytosolic proteases of human erythrocytes. Biochim Biophys Acta 1859:2319–2326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Starr CG, He J, Wimley WC (2016) Host cell interactions are a significant barrier to the clinical utility of peptide antibiotics. ACS Chem Biol 11:3391–3399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Starr CG, Maderdrut JL, He J, Coy DH, Wimley WC (2018) Pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide is a potent broad-spectrum antimicrobial peptide: structure-activity relationships. Peptides 104:35–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Steiner H, Hultmark D, Engstrom A, Bennich H, Boman HG (1981) Sequence and specificity of two antibacterial proteins involved in insect immunity. Nature (London) 292:246–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Steiner H, Andreu D, Merrifield RB (1988) Binding and action of cecropin and cecropin analogues: antibacterial peptides from insects. Biochim Biophys Acta 939:260–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Tran D et al (2002) Homodimeric theta-defensins from rhesus macaque leukocytes: isolation, synthesis, antimicrobial activities, and bacterial binding properties of the cyclic peptides. J Biol Chem 277:3079–3084CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wang G, Li X, Wang Z (2016) APD3: the antimicrobial peptide database as a tool for research and education. Nucleic Acids Res 44:D1087–D1093CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Werle M, Bernkop-Schnurch A (2006) Strategies to improve plasma half life time of peptide and protein drugs. Amino Acids 30:351–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Wiedman G, Kim SY, Zapata-Mercado E, Wimley WC, Hristova K (2016) PH-triggered, macromolecule-sized poration of lipid bilayers by synthetically evolved peptides. J Am Chem Soc 139:937–945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wimley WC (2010) Describing the mechanism of antimicrobial peptide action with the interfacial activity model. ACS Chem Biol 5:905–917CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wolfmeier H, Pletzer D, Mansour SC, Hancock REW (2017) New perspectives in biofilm eradication. ACS Infect Dis 4:93–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Yeaman MR, Yount NY (2003) Mechanisms of antimicrobial peptide action and resistance. Pharmacol Rev 55:27–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Zasloff M (1987) Magainins, a class of antimicrobial peptides from Xenopus skin: isolation, characterization of two active forms, and partial cDNA sequence of a precursor. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 84:5449–5453CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biochemistry and Molecular BiologyTulane University School of MedicineNew OrleansUSA

Personalised recommendations