2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.mimet.2015.11.012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of lipid and detergent enzyme environments for identifying inhibitors of membrane-bound energy-transducing proteins

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Bacteria are routinely grown, and antimicrobial screening conducted, under conditions optimized for growth in the laboratory (oxygenation, temperature, pH, nutrient availability), even though conditions under which the target organisms cause disease may differ considerably from laboratory conditions and in fact, may be ‘sub-optimal’ for growth (Cooper, 2013). Variations in screening conditions have been shown to identify different inhibitors both in target-based and phenotypic screens (Miller et al, 2009; Dunn et al, 2015). Furthermore, it has recently been shown that apparently simple antimicrobial killing assays are very sensitive to variations in culture conditions and bacterial growth phase (Harms et al, 2017).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Bacteria are routinely grown, and antimicrobial screening conducted, under conditions optimized for growth in the laboratory (oxygenation, temperature, pH, nutrient availability), even though conditions under which the target organisms cause disease may differ considerably from laboratory conditions and in fact, may be ‘sub-optimal’ for growth (Cooper, 2013). Variations in screening conditions have been shown to identify different inhibitors both in target-based and phenotypic screens (Miller et al, 2009; Dunn et al, 2015). Furthermore, it has recently been shown that apparently simple antimicrobial killing assays are very sensitive to variations in culture conditions and bacterial growth phase (Harms et al, 2017).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Type II NADH dehydrogenase (NDH-2) was purified and reconstituted into proteoliposomes as described by Dunn et al [2] , [3] . Detergent-solubilised (DS) NDH-2 or lipid-reconstituted (LR) NDH-2 were screened by end point 96-well assay (340 nm, Varioskan® Flash Thermo Scientific, in the presence of 100 μM menadione and 20 μM test compound.…”
Section: Experimental Design Materials and Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Screening was carried out in technical triplicate against each compound library. NADH: menadione oxidoreductase inhibition/stimulation was calculated as a percentage of control activity for either DS or LR protein [2] . Compounds showing inhibition (≤70% control) or activation (≥130% control) in at least 2 of the 3 independent screening replicates were considered hits.…”
Section: Experimental Design Materials and Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation