전체메뉴
검색
Article Search

JMB Journal of Microbiolog and Biotechnology

QR Code QR Code

Review


References

  1. Loessner MJ. 2005. Bacteriophage endolysins--current state of research and applications. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 8: 480-487.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  2. Young I, Wang I, Roof WD. 2000. Phages will out: strategies of host cell lysis. Trends Microbiol. 8: 120-128.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  3. Nelson D, Loomis L, Fischetti VA. 2001. Prevention and elimination of upper respiratory colonization of mice by group A streptococci by using a bacteriophage lytic enzyme. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98: 4107-4112.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  4. Nelson DC, Schmelcher M, Rodriguez-Rubio L, Klumpp J, Pritchard DG, Dong S, et al. 2012. Endolysins as antimicrobials. Adv. Virus Res. 83: 299-365.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  5. Korndörfer IP, Danzer J, Schmelcher M, Zimmer M, Skerra A, Loessner MJ. 2006. The crystal structure of the bacteriophage PSA endolysin reveals a unique fold responsible for specific recognition of Listeria cell walls. J. Mol. Biol. 364: 678-689.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  6. Becker SC, Foster-Frey J, Donovan DM. 2008. The phage K lytic enzyme LysK and lysostaphin act synergistically to kill MRSA. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 287: 185-191.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  7. Pritchard DG, Dong S, Kirk MC, Cartee RT, Baker JR. 2007. LambdaSa1 and LambdaSa2 prophage lysins of Streptococcus agalactiae. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 73: 7150-7154.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  8. Oechslin F, Daraspe J, Giddey M, Moreillon P, Resch G. 2013. In vitro characterization of PlySK1249, a novel phage lysin, and assessment of its antibacterial activity in a mouse model of Streptococcus agalactiae bacteremia. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 57: 6276-6283.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  9. Shannon R, Radford DR, Balamurugan S. 2020. Impacts of food matrix on bacteriophage and endolysin antimicrobial efficacy and performance. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 60: 1631-1640.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  10. Schmelcher M, Donovan DM, Loessner MJ. 2012. Bacteriophage endolysins as novel antimicrobials. Future Microbiol. 7: 1147-1171.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  11. Sykilinda NN, Nikolaeva AY, Shneider MM, Mishkin DV, Patutin AA, Popov VO, et al. 2018. Structure of an acinetobacter broadrange prophage endolysin reveals a C-terminal α-helix with the proposed role in activity against live bacterial cells. Viruses 10: 309.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  12. Raz A, Serrano A, Hernandez A, Euler CW, Fischetti VA. 2019. Isolation of phage lysins that effectively kill Pseudomonas aeruginosa in mouse models of lung and skin infection. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 63: e00024-19.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  13. Lai MJ, Lin NT, Hu A, Soo PC, Chen LK, Chen LH, et al. 2011. Antibacterial activity of Acinetobacter baumannii phage ϕAB2 endolysin (LysAB2) against both gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 90: 529-539.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  14. Walmagh M, Briers Y, dos Santos SB, Azeredo J, Lavigne R. 2012. Characterization of modular bacteriophage endolysins from Myoviridae phages OBP, 201φ2-1 and PVP-SE1. PLoS One 7: e36991.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  15. Briers Y, Schmelcher M, Loessner MJ, Hendrix J, Engelborghs Y, Volckaert G, et al. 2009. The high-affinity peptidoglycan binding domain of Pseudomonas phage endolysin KZ144. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 383: 187-191.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  16. Gerstmans H, Grimon D, Gutiérrez D, Lood C, Rodríguez A, van Noort V, et al. 2020. A VersaTile-driven platform for rapid hit-tolead development of engineered lysins. Sci. Adv. 6: eaaz1136.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  17. Gutiérrez D, Fernández L, Rodríguez A, García P. 2018. Are phage lytic proteins the secret weapon to kill Staphylococcus aureus? mBio 9: e01923-17.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  18. García JL, García E, Arrarás A, García P, Ronda C, López R. 1987. Cloning, purification, and biochemical characterization of the pneumococcal bacteriophage Cp-1 lysin. J. Virol. 61: 2573-2580.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  19. Pritchard DG, Dong S, Baker JR, Engler JA. 2004. The bifunctional peptidoglycan lysin of Streptococcus agalactiae bacteriophage B30. Microbiology (Reading) 150: 2079-2087.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  20. Alrafaie AM, Stafford GP. 2023. Enterococcal bacteriophage: A survey of the tail associated lysin landscape. Virus Res. 327: 199073.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  21. Paradis-Bleau C, Cloutier I, Lemieux L, Sanschagrin F, Laroche J, Auger M, et al. 2007. Peptidoglycan lytic activity of the Pseudomonas aeruginosa phage phiKZ gp144 lytic transglycosylase. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 266: 201-209.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  22. Becker SC, Dong S, Baker JR, Foster-Frey J, Pritchard DG, Donovan DM. 2009. LysK CHAP endopeptidase domain is required for lysis of live staphylococcal cells. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 294: 52-60.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  23. Loessner MJ, Wendlinger G, Scherer S. 1995. Heterogeneous endolysins in Listeria monocytogenes bacteriophages: a new class of enzymes and evidence for conserved holin genes within the siphoviral lysis cassettes. Mol. Microbiol. 16: 1231-1241.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  24. Navarre WW, Ton-That H, Faull KF, Schneewind O. 1999. Multiple enzymatic activities of the murein hydrolase from staphylococcal phage phi11. Identification of a D-alanyl-glycine endopeptidase activity. J. Biol. Chem. 274: 15847-15856.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  25. Pastagia M, Schuch R, Fischetti VA, Huang DB. 2013. Lysins: the arrival of pathogen-directed anti-infectives. J. Med. Microbiol. 62: 1506-1516.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  26. Fischetti VA. 2008. Bacteriophage lysins as effective antibacterials. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 11: 393-400.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  27. Vollmer W, Blanot D, de Pedro MA. 2008. Peptidoglycan structure and architecture. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 32: 149-167.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  28. Fernandes S, São-José C. 2016. More than a hole: the holin lethal function may be required to fully sensitize bacteria to the lytic action of canonical endolysins. Mol. Microbiol. 102: 92-106.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  29. Ferro S, Amorico T, Deo P. 2018. Role of food sanitising treatments in inducing the 'viable but nonculturablé state of microorganisms. Food Control 91: 321-329.
    CrossRef
  30. Maciejewska B, Olszak T, Drulis-Kawa Z. 2018. Applications of bacteriophages versus phage enzymes to combat and cure bacterial infections: an ambitious and also a realistic application? Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 102: 2563-2581.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  31. Schuch R, Nelson D, Fischetti VA. 2002. A bacteriolytic agent that detects and kills Bacillus anthracis. Nature 418: 884-889.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  32. Domenech M, García E, Moscoso M. 2011. In vitro destruction of Streptococcus pneumoniae biofilms with bacterial and phage peptidoglycan hydrolases. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 55: 4144-4148.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  33. Yang H, Linden SB, Wang J, Yu J, Nelson DC, Wei H. 2015. A chimeolysin with extended-spectrum streptococcal host range found by an induced lysis-based rapid screening method. Sci. Rep. 5: 17257.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  34. Kim S, Lee DW, Jin JS, Kim J. 2020. Antimicrobial activity of LysSS, a novel phage endolysin, against Acinetobacter baumannii and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J. Glob. Antimicrob. Resist. 22: 32-39.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  35. Wu M, Hu K, Xie Y, Liu Y, Mu D, Guo H, et al. 2018. A novel phage PD-6A3, and its endolysin Ply6A3, with extended lytic activity against Acinetobacter baumannii. Front. Microbiol. 9: 3302.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  36. Cheng Q, Fischetti VA. 2007. Mutagenesis of a bacteriophage lytic enzyme PlyGBS significantly increases its antibacterial activity against group B streptococci. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 74: 1284-1291.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  37. Mayer MJ, Garefalaki V, Spoerl R, Narbad A, Meijers R. 2011. Structure-based modification of a Clostridium difficile-targeting endolysin affects activity and host range. J. Bacteriol. 193: 5477-5486.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  38. Schmelcher M, Tchang VS, Loessner MJ. 2011. Domain shuffling and module engineering of Listeria phage endolysins for enhanced lytic activity and binding affinity. Microb. Biotechnol. 4: 651-662.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  39. Rodríguez-Rubio L, Martínez B, Rodríguez A, Donovan DM, García P. 2012. Enhanced staphylolytic activity of the Staphylococcus aureus bacteriophage vB_SauS-phiIPLA88 HydH5 virion-associated peptidoglycan hydrolase: fusions, deletions, and synergy with LysH5. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 78: 2241-2248.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  40. Díez-Martínez R, de Paz HD, Bustamante N, García E, Menéndez M, García P. 2013. Improving the lethal effect of cpl-7, a pneumococcal phage lysozyme with broad bactericidal activity, by inverting the net charge of its cell wall-binding module. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 57: 5355-5365.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  41. Love MJ, Coombes D, Manners SH, Abeysekera GS, Billington C, Dobson RCJ. 2021. The molecular basis for Escherichia coli O157:H7 phage FAHEc1 endolysin function and protein engineering to increase thermal stability. Viruses 13: 1101.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  42. Mao J, Schmelcher M, Harty WJ, Foster-Frey J, Donovan DM. 2013. Chimeric Ply187 endolysin kills Staphylococcus aureus more effectively than the parental enzyme. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 342: 30-36.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  43. Dong Q, Wang J, Yang H, Wei C, Yu J, Zhang Y, et al. 2015. Construction of a chimeric lysin Ply187N-V12C with extended lytic activity against staphylococci and streptococci. Microb. Biotechnol. 8: 210-220.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  44. Fernandes S, Proença D, Cantante C, Silva FA, Leandro C, Lourenço S, et al. 2012. Novel chimerical endolysins with broad antimicrobial activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Microb. Drug Resist. 18: 333-343.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  45. Harris F, Dennison SR, Phoenix DA. 2009. Anionic antimicrobial peptides from eukaryotic organisms. Curr. Protein Pept. Sci. 10: 585-606.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  46. Mahlapuu M, Håkansson J, Ringstad L, Björn C. 2016. Antimicrobial peptides: An emerging category of therapeutic agents. Front. Cell Infect. Microbiol. 6: 194.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  47. Bechinger B. 2015. The SMART model: Soft membranes adapt and respond, also transiently, in the presence of antimicrobial peptides. J. Pept. Sci. 21: 346-355.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  48. Briers Y, Walmagh M, Van Puyenbroeck V, Cornelissen A, Cenens W, Aertsen A, et al. 2014. Engineered endolysin-based "Artilysins" to combat multidrug-resistant gram-negative pathogens. mBio 5: e01379-01314.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  49. Yan G, Yang R, Fan K, Dong H, Gao C, Wang S, et al. 2019. External lysis of Escherichia coli by a bacteriophage endolysin modified with hydrophobic amino acids. AMB Express. 9: 106.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  50. Mancoš M, Šramková Z, Peterková D, Vidová B, Godány AJB. 2020. Functional expression and purification of tailor-made chimeric endolysin with the broad antibacterial spectrum. Biologia 75: 2031-2043.
    CrossRef
  51. Cotter PD, Ross RP, Hill C. 2013. Bacteriocins - a viable alternative to antibiotics? Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 11: 95-105.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  52. Vincent PA, Morero RD. 2009. The structure and biological aspects of peptide antibiotic microcin J25. Curr. Med. Chem. 16: 538-549.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  53. Parks WM, Bottrill AR, Pierrat OA, Durrant MC, Maxwell A. 2007. The action of the bacterial toxin, microcin B17, on DNA gyrase. Biochimie 89: 500-507.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  54. Heselpoth RD, Euler CW, Schuch R, Fischetti VA. 2019. Lysocins: Bioengineered antimicrobials that deliver lysins across the outer membrane of Gram-negative bacteria. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 63: e00342-19.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  55. Lukacik P, Barnard TJ, Keller PW, Chaturvedi KS, Seddiki N, Fairman JW, et al. 2012. Structural engineering of a phage lysin that targets gram-negative pathogens. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109: 9857-9862.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  56. Yan G, Liu J, Ma Q, Zhu R, Guo Z, Gao C, et al. 2017. The N-terminal and central domain of colicin A enables phage lysin to lyse Escherichia coli extracellularly. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 110: 1627-1635.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  57. Zampara A, Sørensen MCH, Grimon D, Antenucci F, Vitt AR, Bortolaia V, et al. 2020. Exploiting phage receptor binding proteins to enable endolysins to kill Gram-negative bacteria. Sci. Rep. 10: 12087.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  58. Plançon L, Janmot C, le Maire M, Desmadril M, Bonhivers M, Letellier L, et al. 2002. Characterization of a high-affinity complex between the bacterial outer membrane protein FhuA and the phage T5 protein pb5. J. Mol. Biol. 318: 557-569.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  59. Mozafari MR, Johnson C, Hatziantoniou S, Demetzos C. 2008. Nanoliposomes and their applications in food nanotechnology. J. Liposome Res. 18: 309-327.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  60. Mozafari MR, Flanagan J, Matia-Merino L, Awati A, Singh H. 2010. Recent trends in the lipid-based nanoencapsulation of antioxidants and their role in foods. J. Sci. Food Agric. 86: 2038-2045.
    CrossRef
  61. Alhajlan M, Alhariri M, Omri A. 2013. Efficacy and safety of liposomal clarithromycin and its effect on Pseudomonas aeruginosa virulence factors. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 57: 2694-2704.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  62. Solleti VS, Alhariri M, Halwani M, Omri A. 2015. Antimicrobial properties of liposomal azithromycin for Pseudomonas infections in cystic fibrosis patients. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 70: 784-796.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  63. Rajendran V, Rohra S, Raza M, Hasan GM, Dutt S, Ghosh PC. 2015. Stearylamine liposomal delivery of monensin in combination with free artemisinin eliminates blood stages of Plasmodium falciparum in culture and P. berghei infection in murine malaria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 60: 1304-1318.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  64. Bai J, Yang E, Chang PS, Ryu S. 2019. Preparation and characterization of endolysin-containing liposomes and evaluation of their antimicrobial activities against gram-negative bacteria. Enzyme Microb Technol. 128: 40-48.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  65. Kaur J, Kour A, Panda JJ, Harjai K, Chhibber S. 2020. Exploring endolysin-loaded alginate-chitosan nanoparticles as future remedy for staphylococcal infections. AAPS PharmSciTech. 21: 233.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  66. Abouhmad A, Dishisha T, Amin MA, Hatti-Kaul R. 2017. Immobilization to positively charged cellulose nanocrystals enhances the antibacterial activity and stability of hen egg white and T4 lysozyme. Biomacromolecules 18: 1600-1608.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  67. Agnihotri SA, Mallikarjuna NN, Aminabhavi TM. 2004. Recent advances on chitosan-based micro- and nanoparticles in drug delivery. J. Control Release 100: 5-28.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  68. Ragelle H, Vandermeulen G, Préat V. 2013. Chitosan-based siRNA delivery systems. J. Control Release. 172: 207-218.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  69. Gondil VS, Dube T, Panda JJ, Yennamalli RM, Harjai K, Chhibber S. 2020. Comprehensive evaluation of chitosan nanoparticle based phage lysin delivery system; a novel approach to counter S. pneumoniae infections. Int. J. Pharm. 573: 118850.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  70. Vaara, M. 1992. Agents that increase the permeability of the outer membrane. Microbiol. Rev. 56: 395-411.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  71. Briers Y, Walmagh M, Lavigne R. 2011. Use of bacteriophage endolysin EL188 and outer membrane permeabilizers against Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J. Appl. Microbiol. 110: 778-785.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  72. Lim JA, Shin H, Heu S, Ryu S. 2014. Exogenous lytic activity of SPN9CC endolysin against gram-negative bacteria. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 24: 803-811.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  73. Walmagh M, Boczkowska B, Grymonprez B, Briers Y, Drulis-Kawa Z, Lavigne R. 2013. Characterization of five novel endolysins from Gram-negative infecting bacteriophages. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 97: 4369-4375.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  74. Oliveira H, Thiagarajan V, Walmagh M, Sillankorva S, Lavigne R, Neves-Petersen MT, et al. 2014. A thermostable Salmonella phage endolysin, Lys68, with broad bactericidal properties against gram-negative pathogens in presence of weak acids. PLoS One 9: e108376.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  75. Oliveira H, Vilas Boas D, Mesnage S, Kluskens LD, Lavigne R, Sillankorva S, et al. 2016. Structural and enzymatic characterization of ABgp46, a novel phage endolysin with broad anti-Gram-negative bacterial activity. Front. Microbiol. 7: 208.
    CrossRef

Article

Review

J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2024; 34(6): 1189-1196

Published online June 28, 2024 https://doi.org/10.4014/jmb.2312.12050

Copyright © The Korean Society for Microbiology and Biotechnology.

Research Progress on Strategies for Improving the Enzyme Properties of Bacteriophage Endolysins

Yulu Wang1,2, Xue Wang2, Xin Liu2*, and Bokun Lin1,2*

1Shunde Women and Children's Hospital, Guangdong Medical University, Foshan 528300, P.R. China
2Dongguan Key Laboratory of Public Health Laboratory Science, School of Public Health, Guangdong Medical University, Dongguan 523808, P.R. China

Correspondence to:Xin Liu,         lx@gdmu.edu.cn
Bokun Lin,     bklin@gdmu.edu.cn

Received: January 2, 2024; Revised: February 6, 2024; Accepted: February 8, 2024

Abstract

Bacterial resistance to commonly used antibiotics is one of the major challenges to be solved today. Bacteriophage endolysins (Lysins) have become a hot research topic as a new class of antibacterial agents. They have promising applications in bacterial infection prevention and control in multiple fields, such as livestock and poultry farming, food safety, clinical medicine and pathogen detection. However, many phage endolysins display low bactericidal activities, short half-life and narrow lytic spectrums. Therefore, some methods have been used to improve the enzyme properties (bactericidal activity, lysis spectrum, stability and targeting the substrate, etc) of bacteriophage endolysins, including deletion or addition of domains, DNA mutagenesis, chimerization of domains, fusion to the membrane-penetrating peptides, fusion with domains targeting outer membrane transport systems, encapsulation, the usage of outer membrane permeabilizers. In this review, research progress on the strategies for improving their enzyme properties are systematically presented, with a view to provide references for the development of lysins with excellent performances.

Keywords: Phage, endolysin, bactericidal activity, lysis spectrum, outer membrane permeabilizers

Introduction

Bacteriophages are viruses that specifically invade and infect bacteria. They are divided into temperate phages and virulent phages. Virulent phages could proliferate rapidly in bacterial cells, produce endolysins to lyse the bacteria and release offspring phages [1, 2]. Phage endolysins are known as peptidoglycan-degrading proteins that could rapidly induce the lysis and death of bacteria by targeting the chemical bonds of peptidoglycan (PG) on the bacterial cell wall [3]. Because these PG hydrolases lyse ‘‘from within’’, they are referred to as ‘‘endolysins’’ or simply ‘‘lysins’’ [4].

According to the Gram-staining of host bacteria, bacteriophage endolysins are divided into two groups. One could be called GP-Lysins which are produced by bacteriophages of Gram-positive bacteria (GP-phages). The other one could be called GN-Lysins which are produced by bacteriophages of Gram-negative bacteria (GN-phages). GP-Lysins usually have a modular structure. As shown in Fig. 1A, GP-Lysins contain two domains, namely the N-terminal catalytic domain (EAD) and the C-terminal cell wall binding domain (CBD), which are connected by a short peptide. The EAD is capable of acting on most chemical bonds of the PG network in the bacterial cell wall to cause bacterial lysis [1], while the CBD is responsible for targeting the endolysin to the substrate and conferring specificity for recognizing host cells. The high specificity of lysins offers it an advantage over conventional antibiotics as endolysins do not disturb the normal microflora. Typically, these is a flexible interdomain linker sequence between the EAD and the CBD [5]. Usually, endolysins have only one EAD and one CBD, but some lysins were found to have more than one CBD or EAD arranged in different order [6-8].

Figure 1. Structures of bacteriophage lysins and their catalytic sites. (A) Basic structures of GP-Lysins; (B) Basic structures of GN-Lysins; (C) Catalytic sites of phage lysins (1: N-acetyl cyclase; 2: N-acetyl-β-D-aminoglucosidase; 3: Nacetylcytidyl-L-alanine amidase; 4: peptide chain endonuclease; 5: peptidase; 6: transglycosidase); where: GlcNAc: Nacetylglucosamine; MurNAc: N-acetylcytidylic acid; L-Ala: L-alanine; D-Glu: D-glutamic acid; L-Lys: L-lysine; D-Ala: Dalanine; L-Gly: L-glycine.

As shown in Fig. 1B, GN-lysins usually only have one globular structure with a single EAD [9, 10]. Gram-negative bacteria have an outer membrane (OM) composed of lipopolysaccharide (LPS) compared to Gram-positive bacteria. The OM of Gram-negative bacteria effectively prevents GN-lysins from acting on the cell wall externally. To date, only a few GN-lysins are able to lyse Gram-negative bacteria without the help of OM permeants. These GN-lysins contain amphipathic helical structures or carry positively charged groups which confer the ability to penetrate or disrupt the bacterial OM, thereby accessing and degrading the PG layer and ultimately leading to bacterial lysis and death [11, 12]. For example, the α-helical structure formed by the C-terminus of lysin AcLys enables it to penetrate the OM. Additionally, the positively charged groups present in the C-terminus enhance its ability to penetrate the OM [11, 13]. However, there are also a few of GN-Lysins owning a modular structure with a CBD at the N-terminus and a EAD at the C-terminus [14, 15]. These GN-Lysins obtain high lytic activities towards Gram-negative bacteria due to the presence of CBD which helps the lysins get close to the substrate [14, 16]. Different endolysins differ considerably in protein structure and enzymatic activity. Usually, the endolysin exhibits only one hydrolytic activity. As shown in Fig. 1C and Table 1, depending on the site of action of the EAD on the bacterial cell wall, lysins can be classified into four categories [17]. They are N-acetylmuramidase, transglycosylase, amidase and endopeptidase.

Table 1 . GN-Lysins that can pass through the outer membrane of Gram-negative bacteria..

Host bacteriaLysinsReferences
Acinetobacter baumanniiLysAB3, LysAB4[20]
PlyAB1[21]
PlyF307[22]
Lys-ABP1-01[23]
Abgp46[15]
LysPA26[24]
LysAB54[25]
Pseudomonas aeruginosaLysPA26[24]
Cytrobacter fowleriCfP1[26]
Escherichia coliT5[27]
SPN9CC[28]


Many GP-lysins exhibit rapid "contact-dependent" bactericidal activity, capable of reducing bacteria to undetectable levels within seconds [25, 26]. Comparatively, the bacterial killing kinetics of GN-lysins are in a slower manner. Endolysins contain at least one structural domain responsible for the enzymatic cleavage of PG, also known as murein, which is the major structural component of the bacterial cell wall. PGs form a vesicle-like structure that surrounds the bacterial cytoplasmic membrane and imparts the necessary mechanical resistance to avoid cell lysis [27]. Therefore, uncontrolled breakdown of the murein structure typically results in osmotic cell lysis. Significantly, exogenous addition of endolysins to a susceptible host can be exploited to produce lysis from without due to the high osmotic pressure within the cell [28]. In 2001, Nelson et al. first demonstrated that endolysins could be used as antibacterial agents to treat related diseases [3]. Since then, researchers had paid increasing attention to the study of endolysins. In addition, the excessive and abusive use of antibiotics has led to increasing bacterial resistance to antibiotics [29]. And the development of new methods that can effectively combat bacterial infections has become an imminent task. Compared to traditional antibiotics, endolysins have advantages such as high bactericidal specificity, not altering the normal flora, low probability of inducing bacterial resistance, can be genetically engineered, having synergistic effects with other antibacterial agents, effective elimination of biofilm and easy accessibility [30-33]. However, many native endolysins displayed low bactericidal activities and other defects. Therefore, some methods have been developed to improve the bactericidal activity and stability of endolysins. This review systematically describes the research progress on strategies for improving enzyme properties of endolysins.

Strategies for Improving Enzyme Properties of Endolysins

GP-Lysins usually show good antibacterial activities against Gram-positive bacteria. They generally have a modular structure, consisting of multiple EADs and CBD, which can be used as the basis for modifying the functional domains, such as deletion or addition or direct mutation of domains, chimeolysins and so on to improve the bactericidal activity, bactericidal spectrum, stability, solubility and adaptability to the environment.

The OM of Gram-negative bacteria effectively prevents most lysins from reaching the PG layer and acting on the cell wall externally. Though there were a few of GN-Lysins reported to have the ability to penetrate the OM by themselves, it should be noted that these lysins often suffer from limited availability and insufficient cleavage activity [11, 12, 34, 35]. Therefore, how lysins can pass through the OM of Gram-negative bacteria become a key point. Here in this review, the methods that can improve the activity of lysins against Gram-negative bacteria are summarized including fusion with the membrane-penetrating peptides (MPPs), fusion with domains targeting OM receptors or transport systems, encapsulation strategy and using OM-penetrating agents. The methods used to improve GP-Lysins are also applicable to GN-Lysins and vice versa. It is also possible to explore the development of lysins with excellent performances by interoperability of multiple methods.

Deletion of Cell Wall-Binding Domain or Changing the Net Charge of Catalytic Domain

Classical lysins require a CBD that targets the catalytic domain to the PG layer. For these classical lysins, specificity and bacteriolytic activity require the strong binding of the CBD to the cell wall. Once the CBD was deleted, the catalytic domain would lose lytic activity. Therefore, these classical lysins are CBD-dependent. However, some lysins are CBD-independent and the removal of the CBD conversely expanded the lytic spectrum and increased the lytic activity. For example, the truncated lysin PlyGBS90-1 consisting of the EAD and the last 13 amino acids at the C-terminal end of the wild lysin PlyGBS obtained a 28-fold higher lytic activity against group B Streptococci than the full-length enzyme [36]. The C-terminal truncated protein retaining the EAD of lysin CD27L obtained an increased lytic activity against Clostridium difficile and a broadened lytic spectrum whereas the N-terminal truncated protein had no lytic activity [37]. It was found that the removal of CBD of CBD-independent lysins could alter the net charge of EAD to be positive [43]. Since the cell wall of Gram-positive bacteria is usually negatively charged. Therefore, the removal of CBD of CBD-independent lysins may lead to increased interactions between the EAD and the cell wall. That is why the CBD-independent lysins obtained an increased lytic activity when their CBDs were deleted. On the other hand, the CBD-dependence of lysin could be eliminated or created by engineering a reversal of sign of the net charge of the EAD [43]. Therefore, deletion of CBD or changing the net charge of EAD could be a facile approach for improving the lytic activity of CBD-independent lysins.

Addition of Domains

Increasing the affinity of endolysins to target cells by modifying the CBDs could improve the lytic efficacy. Schmelcher et al. demonstrated that the endolysin Ply500 equipped with an extra copy of its natural CBD improved the affinity by 50-fold and increased its ability to act at high salt concentrations [38]. The endolysin HydH5SH3b was generated by the addition of lysostaphin CBD (SH3b) to lysin HydH5 of Staphylococcus aureus phage phiIPLA88, had a higher activity and thermostability than the parental HydH5 [39]. The possible reasons were that lysins in solution may require the CBD to optimally recognize their substrate and the extended lysin HydH5SH3b may have a higher conformational stability than the wild type lysin HydH5. Although CBD is not always necessary for basic activities of lysins, it is needed to achieve high levels of activity for some lysins.

DNA Mutagenesis

Various DNA mutagenesis methods including site-directed mutation and random mutagenesis, had been used to produce mutants of lysins with enhanced lytic activity and/or stronger thermostability. The mutation of 15 amino acids in the CBD of the pneumococcal lysin Cpl-7, resulted in the inversion of the sign of the charge of CBD, was performed to generate the mutant lysin Cpl-7S which obtained increased lytic activities and an expanded lytic spectrum against Streptococcus pneumoniae, S. pyogenes and other pathogens [40]. These findings provided a strategy to improve the lytic activity of endolysins based on facilitating their pass through the negatively charged bacterial envelope by modulating the net charge of the CBDs [40]. The 88th amino acid glutamate of lysin LysF1 was not conserved and was mutated into three hydrophobic amino acids to generate three mutants, namely Glu88Leu, Glu88Phe and Glu88Met, respectively [41]. Compared to wild lysins, these three mutants obtained improved thermal stability and lytic activity. Endolysin CD27L caused cell lysis of the pathogen C. difficile. The Leu 98 of lysin CD27L was modified to a Trp residue which was found in an endolysin from a bacteriophage of Listeria monocytogenes (PlyPSA). This mutation in CD27L resulted in an increased activity against selected serotypes of L. monocytogenes, implying that the catalytic domain alone contained features that target a specific bacterial species and demonstrating the potential to tune the species specificity of the catalytic domain of an endolysin [37]. With the development of gene synthesis technology, it has become easier to perform point mutations on genes. However, the selection of amino acid residue for the point mutation remains a great challenge.

Chimerization of Domains

The domains of endolysins can be exchanged or recombined with other domains to generate chimeolysins with desirable properties. This approach could increase the catalytic capacity of the EAD and/or the ability of the CBD to recognize substrates. Especially, the substitution of CBD is the most commonly used means. New CBDs could alter the bactericidal activity and host specificity of the chimeric lysin. Chimeolysins usually could obtain broader lytic spectrums, higher lytic activities or other improvements. To further improve the lytic activity, Ply187AN was fused with the CBD of lysin LysK to generate the chimeolysin Ply187AN-KSH3b which was more active against S. aureus than Ply187AN [42]. The chimeolysin Ply187N-V12C which was produced by the fusion of the EAD of staphylococcal lysin Ply187 and the CBD of enterococcal lysin PlyV12 obtained an extended lytic spectrum including not just Staphylococcus but also Streptococcus and Enterococcus [43]. The CBD of the staphylococcal lysin Lys87 was recombined with the EAD of enterococcal lysin Lys168 and Lys170 to generate the chimeric lysin Lys168-87 and Lys170-87, respectively [44]. These two chimeolysins exhibited a broader lytic spectrum against Enterococci, Streptococci and more than 96% of tested clinical isolates of S. aureus. Their solubilities were also enhanced.

Chimeolysins compensate for the deficiencies of single lysins and avoid degradation of exogenous gene expression products by the host cell protease system. It has been shown that chimerization of lysins with similar hosts may broaden their lytic spectrums and chimerization of lysins with different hosts may change and broaden their efficacy in a wide range of genera [10].

Fusion to the Membrane-Penetrating Peptides

The main component of the OM of Gram-negative bacteria is LPS of which the stability is maintained by the ionic interactions between divalent cations and phosphate groups and the hydrophobic accumulation of lipid A. The majority of these MPP have a positive net charge, but there were also anionic antimicrobial peptides [45]. These peptides possess both hydrophilic and hydrophobic regions on their surfaces. The cationic section of the peptide interacts with the negatively charged bacterial cell surface through electrostatic interactions, while the hydrophobic section interacts with the lipids present in the bacterial membrane. As a consequence, the MPP could help the lysin to pass through the LPS layer, promote a change in the OM and reach the periplasmic space and degrade the PG leading to the eventual death of the bacteria [46, 47]. In a 2019 study, it was found that the fusion of hydrophobic amino acids at the C-terminus of the lysin Lysep3 also increased antimicrobial activity against E. coli and the lytic activity was positive related to the number of hydrophobic amino acids within a certain range [49].

Therefore, MPP plays a key role in this strategy for enhancing the lysins’ activities. In an early study, seven MPPs were screened for fusions with two modular lysins (Lysin OBPgp279 from Pseudomonas fluorescens phage; Lysin PVP-SE1gp146 from Salmonella phage) at the N-terminal, respectively [48]. Within these 14 recombinants, lysins LoGT-001 and LoGT-008 carrying the membrane-penetrating peptide PCNP (Amino acid sequence: KRKKKRKKKKRK) obtained enhanced antibacterial activities against P. aeruginosa and A. baumannii. The fused lysin with higher bactericidal activity towards E. coli was LoGT-037, in which the two MPPs of PCNP and HPP (hydrophobic pentapeptide FFVAP) were tandemly fused to the N-terminus of lysin OBPgp279. Since MPPs tend to penetrate the OM of a wide range of bacteria, lysins fused with MPPs usually obtain a broader lysis spectrum than the wild enzyme. It was reported that lysin Lyt mu 1/6 lysing Streptomyces aureus was fused with a cationic MPP of lysozyme T4 to generate an artificial lysin LytAmfi obtaining a broader lytic spectrum than the wild lysin, with lytic activities against a wide range of clinically common Gram-negative bacteria including E. coli, Bacillus immobilis and Citrobacter fumigatus [50].

There is no fixed pattern for the fusion of the MPP with lysins. The fusion position may be the N-terminal or C-terminal end or both the two ends of the lysin. The best fusion pattern for different lysins should be explored experimentally. Fusion with MPP is not only applicable to GN-Lysins but also to GP-Lysins.

Fusion with Domains Targeting OM Receptors or Transport Systems

Bacteriocins are antimicrobial peptides or proteins produced by bacteria that could inhibit or kill the closely related bacteria [51]. Bacteriocins can act by targeting specific receptors on the surface of susceptible bacteria, leading to the disruption of membrane integrity and subsequent cell death [52, 53]. The fusion protein of lysin and bacteriocin could exploit the delivery systems used by bacteriocins to translocate through the OM and reach the periplasm to induce PG cleavage [54]. For example, pyocin S2 (PyS2), which is a bacteriocin of P. aeruginosa, was fused to the GN4 lysin to generate the PyS2-GN4 lysocin, which could pass through the FpvAI protein channel in the bacterial OM by active transport and enter the periplasm and disrupt the PG layer leading to intracellular membrane imbalance and cytoplasmic leakage [54].

The OM transporter protein of bacteria could also help the lysin to cross the OM of the target bacteria and reach the PG layer. Pesticin is a bacteriocin produced by Yersinia pestis. The binding domain of pesticin specifically targets the OM transporter FyuA which is responsible for the toxin uptake and common in pathogenic bacteria. The binding domain of pesticin was fused with the N-terminus of E. coli phage T4 lysozyme to form a hybrid lysin [55]. This hybrid lysin kills specific Yersinia and pathogenic E. coli strains and, importantly, can evade the pesticin immunity protein (Pim) giving it a distinct advantage over pesticin. An analogous approach was used to promote OM translocation of Lysep3, the endolysin of E. coli phage vB_EcoM-ep3. The translocation and receptor binding domains of colicin A were fused with lysin Lysep3 to construct a fusion lysin Colicin-Lysep3 targeting the receptor BtuB on the OM of E. coli, which showed good bactericidal activities against E. coli both in vivo and in vitro. It was demonstrated for the first time that colicin A fragment could enable the lysin to lyse E. coli externally [56].

Moreover, the fusion of the receptor-binding proteins (RBPs) with endolysins, coined as “Innolysin”, has recently been introduced as a novel approach to target Gram-negative bacteria [57]. Phages specifically recognize bacterial surface receptors through RBPs. The Pb5 monomer located in the tail of phage T5 is a good RBP that specifically and stably binds to the bacterial receptor FhuA [58]. The RBP Pb5 was fused with 23 phage endolysins to construct 228 novel RBP-endolysin hybrids. Among these innolysins, the innolysin Ec21 which was fused by the endolysin of phage T5 with RBP Pb5 had the highest antibacterial activity reducing E. coli by 2.20 ± 0.09 log [57]. This innolysin approach requires the presence of a corresponding receptor on the OM of Gram-negative bacteria.

Encapsulation Strategy

In addition to the fusion engineering approach, GP-lysins can be encapsulated to enhance their stabilities and permeabilities. Liposomes have spherical structures composed of one or more phospholipid bilayers with a core of water [59]. It is safe for the human body and is therefore widely used to deliver proteins, enzymes, vitamins and antioxidants [60]. Liposomes are known to be able to penetrate bacterial membranes by membrane fusion. Depending on the surface charge of the target site, liposomes can be prepared in cationic or anionic form. Most Gram-negative bacterial membranes have an anionic surface and cationic liposomes have a higher antibacterial effect on Gram-negative bacteria than anionic liposomes because of the stronger interaction between cationic liposomes and negatively charged bacterial membranes [61-63]. The Salmonella lysin BSP16Lys was encapsulated by a cationic liposome consisting of dipalmitoylphosphatidylcholine (DPPC), cholesterol and hexadecylamine. And its efficiency of passing through the OM of Gram-negative bacteria and activity to kill Salmonella and E. coli in the absence of treatment with an OM permeabilizer were increased [64].

Nanoparticles can also be used to encapsulate lysins. LysMR-5 was encapsulated by nanoparticles (Alg-Chi NPs) consisting of alginate and chitosan, resulting in enhanced bactericidal activity. The T4 lysozyme was coupled to cellulose nanocrystals (CNC) resulting in higher thermal stability and bactericidal activity against E. coli and P. aeruginosa compared to its free enzymes [65, 66]. Chitosan is a cationic polyelectrolyte with a number of advantageous biological properties, such as biodegradability, biocompatibility, low immunogenicity, non-toxicity, mucoadhesiveness and ability to increase membrane permeability [67]. Chitosan nanoparticles have also been well explored as macromolecular delivery vehicles such as peptides, proteins, nucleic acids and plasmids to augment their bioavailabilities as well as to protect them from biological environment, hence increasing their in-vivo half-life [68]. This encapsulation strategy using non-biohazardous and biocompatible particles such as chitosan can also be applied to the design of GN-lysins for food safety, such as the pneumocidal activity of endolysin Cpl-1 was maintained in chitosan nanoparticles [69].

Combination with the OM Permeabilizers

The OM of Gram-negative bacteria effectively prevents most lysins from reaching the PG layer and acting on the cell wall externally. To increase the permeability of OM is one solution to solve this problem. Divalent cations (Mg2+ and Ca2+) are known to be crucial for the integrity of the bacterial OM. There are many kinds of OM permeabilizers which are generally divided into two categories. The first category is polyvalent cationic compounds such as polymyxin and its derivatives, aminoglycosides and lysine polymers. They can compete to replace the bivalent cations for the interaction with the anionic LPS molecules, leading to disorganization of the OM [70, 71].

The second category of OM permeabilizers is chelating agent. Chelation of divalent cations is a well-established method to permeabilize Gram-negative bacteria. Among numerous chelating agents, EDTA (ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid) is the most commonly used. EDTA removes divalent cations from their binding sites, causing OM disruption. Several studies had shown that EDTA had the strongest effect on cell wall penetration for lysins [15, 72, 73]. Weak organic acids in protonated form are also used as chelating agents. In general, most lysins are inactive at low pH, but the Salmonella phage endolysin Lys68 retained its protein structure and was enzymatically active in the pH range of 4.0-10.0, which was explained as the result of the combined action with weak organic acids (citric and malic) [74]. In fact, these weak organic acids were found to be membrane permeable at low pH. Further studies found that the permeabilizing effect of citric or malic acid on Salmonella infections was mainly due to acidification as like the effect of adding HCl at similar pH values.

OM permeabilizers could not only enhance the bactericidal activity of lysins, but could also broaden the lytic spectrum. The lysin ABgp46 only had the antibacterial activity against A. baumannii in the absence of OM permeabilizers. With the addition of citric and malic acids, its antibacterial activity against A. baumannii was enhanced and obtained lytic activities against P. aeruginosa and S. typhimurium [75].

Conclusion

Bacteriophage endolysins are promising alternatives to antibiotics. The strategies that can be used to improve the enzyme properties (bactericidal activity, lysis spectrum, stability and targeting the substrate, etc) of bacteriophage endolysins are summarized as follows: Deletion of the cell wall-binding domain (For the CBD-independent lysins) or changing the net charge of catalytic domain; Addition of domains (Mainly addition of the cell wall-binding domain); DNA mutagenesis (Site-directed mutation and random mutagenesis); Chimerization of domains; Fusion to the MPPs (Helping lysins to reach the substrate); Fusion with domains targeting OM receptors or transport systems (Helping lysins to reach the substrate); Encapsulation strategy; Combination with the OM permeabilizers (Helping lysins to reach the substrate). Among these strategies, those related to adding other reagents in the enzyme reaction system, like encapsulation of lysins and the usage of OM permeabilizers, have to take into account the safety of those reagents, especially OM permeabilizers. The strategies used to improve GP-Lysins are also applicable to GN-Lysins and vice versa. It is also possible to explore the development of lysins with excellent performances by interoperability of multiple methods.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Talents Recruitment Grant of Yangfan Plan of Guangdong Province (4YF16003G) and Dongguan Science and Technology of Social Development Program (20231800936342).

Author Contributions

Yulu Wang: Writing-original Manuscript, Writing-review and editing. Xue Wang: Editing the Manuscript. Xin Liu: Writing-review and editing the Manuscript. Bokun Lin: Writing-review and editing the Manuscript. The final version of the manuscript was read and approved by all authors.

Conflict of Interest

The authors have no financial conflicts of interest to declare.

Fig 1.

Figure 1.Structures of bacteriophage lysins and their catalytic sites. (A) Basic structures of GP-Lysins; (B) Basic structures of GN-Lysins; (C) Catalytic sites of phage lysins (1: N-acetyl cyclase; 2: N-acetyl-β-D-aminoglucosidase; 3: Nacetylcytidyl-L-alanine amidase; 4: peptide chain endonuclease; 5: peptidase; 6: transglycosidase); where: GlcNAc: Nacetylglucosamine; MurNAc: N-acetylcytidylic acid; L-Ala: L-alanine; D-Glu: D-glutamic acid; L-Lys: L-lysine; D-Ala: Dalanine; L-Gly: L-glycine.
Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology 2024; 34: 1189-1196https://doi.org/10.4014/jmb.2312.12050

Table 1 . GN-Lysins that can pass through the outer membrane of Gram-negative bacteria..

Host bacteriaLysinsReferences
Acinetobacter baumanniiLysAB3, LysAB4[20]
PlyAB1[21]
PlyF307[22]
Lys-ABP1-01[23]
Abgp46[15]
LysPA26[24]
LysAB54[25]
Pseudomonas aeruginosaLysPA26[24]
Cytrobacter fowleriCfP1[26]
Escherichia coliT5[27]
SPN9CC[28]

References

  1. Loessner MJ. 2005. Bacteriophage endolysins--current state of research and applications. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 8: 480-487.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  2. Young I, Wang I, Roof WD. 2000. Phages will out: strategies of host cell lysis. Trends Microbiol. 8: 120-128.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  3. Nelson D, Loomis L, Fischetti VA. 2001. Prevention and elimination of upper respiratory colonization of mice by group A streptococci by using a bacteriophage lytic enzyme. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98: 4107-4112.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  4. Nelson DC, Schmelcher M, Rodriguez-Rubio L, Klumpp J, Pritchard DG, Dong S, et al. 2012. Endolysins as antimicrobials. Adv. Virus Res. 83: 299-365.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  5. Korndörfer IP, Danzer J, Schmelcher M, Zimmer M, Skerra A, Loessner MJ. 2006. The crystal structure of the bacteriophage PSA endolysin reveals a unique fold responsible for specific recognition of Listeria cell walls. J. Mol. Biol. 364: 678-689.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  6. Becker SC, Foster-Frey J, Donovan DM. 2008. The phage K lytic enzyme LysK and lysostaphin act synergistically to kill MRSA. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 287: 185-191.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  7. Pritchard DG, Dong S, Kirk MC, Cartee RT, Baker JR. 2007. LambdaSa1 and LambdaSa2 prophage lysins of Streptococcus agalactiae. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 73: 7150-7154.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  8. Oechslin F, Daraspe J, Giddey M, Moreillon P, Resch G. 2013. In vitro characterization of PlySK1249, a novel phage lysin, and assessment of its antibacterial activity in a mouse model of Streptococcus agalactiae bacteremia. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 57: 6276-6283.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  9. Shannon R, Radford DR, Balamurugan S. 2020. Impacts of food matrix on bacteriophage and endolysin antimicrobial efficacy and performance. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 60: 1631-1640.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  10. Schmelcher M, Donovan DM, Loessner MJ. 2012. Bacteriophage endolysins as novel antimicrobials. Future Microbiol. 7: 1147-1171.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  11. Sykilinda NN, Nikolaeva AY, Shneider MM, Mishkin DV, Patutin AA, Popov VO, et al. 2018. Structure of an acinetobacter broadrange prophage endolysin reveals a C-terminal α-helix with the proposed role in activity against live bacterial cells. Viruses 10: 309.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  12. Raz A, Serrano A, Hernandez A, Euler CW, Fischetti VA. 2019. Isolation of phage lysins that effectively kill Pseudomonas aeruginosa in mouse models of lung and skin infection. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 63: e00024-19.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  13. Lai MJ, Lin NT, Hu A, Soo PC, Chen LK, Chen LH, et al. 2011. Antibacterial activity of Acinetobacter baumannii phage ϕAB2 endolysin (LysAB2) against both gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 90: 529-539.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  14. Walmagh M, Briers Y, dos Santos SB, Azeredo J, Lavigne R. 2012. Characterization of modular bacteriophage endolysins from Myoviridae phages OBP, 201φ2-1 and PVP-SE1. PLoS One 7: e36991.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  15. Briers Y, Schmelcher M, Loessner MJ, Hendrix J, Engelborghs Y, Volckaert G, et al. 2009. The high-affinity peptidoglycan binding domain of Pseudomonas phage endolysin KZ144. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 383: 187-191.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  16. Gerstmans H, Grimon D, Gutiérrez D, Lood C, Rodríguez A, van Noort V, et al. 2020. A VersaTile-driven platform for rapid hit-tolead development of engineered lysins. Sci. Adv. 6: eaaz1136.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  17. Gutiérrez D, Fernández L, Rodríguez A, García P. 2018. Are phage lytic proteins the secret weapon to kill Staphylococcus aureus? mBio 9: e01923-17.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  18. García JL, García E, Arrarás A, García P, Ronda C, López R. 1987. Cloning, purification, and biochemical characterization of the pneumococcal bacteriophage Cp-1 lysin. J. Virol. 61: 2573-2580.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  19. Pritchard DG, Dong S, Baker JR, Engler JA. 2004. The bifunctional peptidoglycan lysin of Streptococcus agalactiae bacteriophage B30. Microbiology (Reading) 150: 2079-2087.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  20. Alrafaie AM, Stafford GP. 2023. Enterococcal bacteriophage: A survey of the tail associated lysin landscape. Virus Res. 327: 199073.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  21. Paradis-Bleau C, Cloutier I, Lemieux L, Sanschagrin F, Laroche J, Auger M, et al. 2007. Peptidoglycan lytic activity of the Pseudomonas aeruginosa phage phiKZ gp144 lytic transglycosylase. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 266: 201-209.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  22. Becker SC, Dong S, Baker JR, Foster-Frey J, Pritchard DG, Donovan DM. 2009. LysK CHAP endopeptidase domain is required for lysis of live staphylococcal cells. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 294: 52-60.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  23. Loessner MJ, Wendlinger G, Scherer S. 1995. Heterogeneous endolysins in Listeria monocytogenes bacteriophages: a new class of enzymes and evidence for conserved holin genes within the siphoviral lysis cassettes. Mol. Microbiol. 16: 1231-1241.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  24. Navarre WW, Ton-That H, Faull KF, Schneewind O. 1999. Multiple enzymatic activities of the murein hydrolase from staphylococcal phage phi11. Identification of a D-alanyl-glycine endopeptidase activity. J. Biol. Chem. 274: 15847-15856.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  25. Pastagia M, Schuch R, Fischetti VA, Huang DB. 2013. Lysins: the arrival of pathogen-directed anti-infectives. J. Med. Microbiol. 62: 1506-1516.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  26. Fischetti VA. 2008. Bacteriophage lysins as effective antibacterials. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 11: 393-400.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  27. Vollmer W, Blanot D, de Pedro MA. 2008. Peptidoglycan structure and architecture. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 32: 149-167.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  28. Fernandes S, São-José C. 2016. More than a hole: the holin lethal function may be required to fully sensitize bacteria to the lytic action of canonical endolysins. Mol. Microbiol. 102: 92-106.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  29. Ferro S, Amorico T, Deo P. 2018. Role of food sanitising treatments in inducing the 'viable but nonculturablé state of microorganisms. Food Control 91: 321-329.
    CrossRef
  30. Maciejewska B, Olszak T, Drulis-Kawa Z. 2018. Applications of bacteriophages versus phage enzymes to combat and cure bacterial infections: an ambitious and also a realistic application? Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 102: 2563-2581.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  31. Schuch R, Nelson D, Fischetti VA. 2002. A bacteriolytic agent that detects and kills Bacillus anthracis. Nature 418: 884-889.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  32. Domenech M, García E, Moscoso M. 2011. In vitro destruction of Streptococcus pneumoniae biofilms with bacterial and phage peptidoglycan hydrolases. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 55: 4144-4148.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  33. Yang H, Linden SB, Wang J, Yu J, Nelson DC, Wei H. 2015. A chimeolysin with extended-spectrum streptococcal host range found by an induced lysis-based rapid screening method. Sci. Rep. 5: 17257.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  34. Kim S, Lee DW, Jin JS, Kim J. 2020. Antimicrobial activity of LysSS, a novel phage endolysin, against Acinetobacter baumannii and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J. Glob. Antimicrob. Resist. 22: 32-39.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  35. Wu M, Hu K, Xie Y, Liu Y, Mu D, Guo H, et al. 2018. A novel phage PD-6A3, and its endolysin Ply6A3, with extended lytic activity against Acinetobacter baumannii. Front. Microbiol. 9: 3302.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  36. Cheng Q, Fischetti VA. 2007. Mutagenesis of a bacteriophage lytic enzyme PlyGBS significantly increases its antibacterial activity against group B streptococci. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 74: 1284-1291.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  37. Mayer MJ, Garefalaki V, Spoerl R, Narbad A, Meijers R. 2011. Structure-based modification of a Clostridium difficile-targeting endolysin affects activity and host range. J. Bacteriol. 193: 5477-5486.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  38. Schmelcher M, Tchang VS, Loessner MJ. 2011. Domain shuffling and module engineering of Listeria phage endolysins for enhanced lytic activity and binding affinity. Microb. Biotechnol. 4: 651-662.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  39. Rodríguez-Rubio L, Martínez B, Rodríguez A, Donovan DM, García P. 2012. Enhanced staphylolytic activity of the Staphylococcus aureus bacteriophage vB_SauS-phiIPLA88 HydH5 virion-associated peptidoglycan hydrolase: fusions, deletions, and synergy with LysH5. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 78: 2241-2248.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  40. Díez-Martínez R, de Paz HD, Bustamante N, García E, Menéndez M, García P. 2013. Improving the lethal effect of cpl-7, a pneumococcal phage lysozyme with broad bactericidal activity, by inverting the net charge of its cell wall-binding module. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 57: 5355-5365.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  41. Love MJ, Coombes D, Manners SH, Abeysekera GS, Billington C, Dobson RCJ. 2021. The molecular basis for Escherichia coli O157:H7 phage FAHEc1 endolysin function and protein engineering to increase thermal stability. Viruses 13: 1101.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  42. Mao J, Schmelcher M, Harty WJ, Foster-Frey J, Donovan DM. 2013. Chimeric Ply187 endolysin kills Staphylococcus aureus more effectively than the parental enzyme. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 342: 30-36.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  43. Dong Q, Wang J, Yang H, Wei C, Yu J, Zhang Y, et al. 2015. Construction of a chimeric lysin Ply187N-V12C with extended lytic activity against staphylococci and streptococci. Microb. Biotechnol. 8: 210-220.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  44. Fernandes S, Proença D, Cantante C, Silva FA, Leandro C, Lourenço S, et al. 2012. Novel chimerical endolysins with broad antimicrobial activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Microb. Drug Resist. 18: 333-343.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  45. Harris F, Dennison SR, Phoenix DA. 2009. Anionic antimicrobial peptides from eukaryotic organisms. Curr. Protein Pept. Sci. 10: 585-606.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  46. Mahlapuu M, Håkansson J, Ringstad L, Björn C. 2016. Antimicrobial peptides: An emerging category of therapeutic agents. Front. Cell Infect. Microbiol. 6: 194.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  47. Bechinger B. 2015. The SMART model: Soft membranes adapt and respond, also transiently, in the presence of antimicrobial peptides. J. Pept. Sci. 21: 346-355.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  48. Briers Y, Walmagh M, Van Puyenbroeck V, Cornelissen A, Cenens W, Aertsen A, et al. 2014. Engineered endolysin-based "Artilysins" to combat multidrug-resistant gram-negative pathogens. mBio 5: e01379-01314.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  49. Yan G, Yang R, Fan K, Dong H, Gao C, Wang S, et al. 2019. External lysis of Escherichia coli by a bacteriophage endolysin modified with hydrophobic amino acids. AMB Express. 9: 106.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  50. Mancoš M, Šramková Z, Peterková D, Vidová B, Godány AJB. 2020. Functional expression and purification of tailor-made chimeric endolysin with the broad antibacterial spectrum. Biologia 75: 2031-2043.
    CrossRef
  51. Cotter PD, Ross RP, Hill C. 2013. Bacteriocins - a viable alternative to antibiotics? Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 11: 95-105.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  52. Vincent PA, Morero RD. 2009. The structure and biological aspects of peptide antibiotic microcin J25. Curr. Med. Chem. 16: 538-549.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  53. Parks WM, Bottrill AR, Pierrat OA, Durrant MC, Maxwell A. 2007. The action of the bacterial toxin, microcin B17, on DNA gyrase. Biochimie 89: 500-507.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  54. Heselpoth RD, Euler CW, Schuch R, Fischetti VA. 2019. Lysocins: Bioengineered antimicrobials that deliver lysins across the outer membrane of Gram-negative bacteria. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 63: e00342-19.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  55. Lukacik P, Barnard TJ, Keller PW, Chaturvedi KS, Seddiki N, Fairman JW, et al. 2012. Structural engineering of a phage lysin that targets gram-negative pathogens. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109: 9857-9862.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  56. Yan G, Liu J, Ma Q, Zhu R, Guo Z, Gao C, et al. 2017. The N-terminal and central domain of colicin A enables phage lysin to lyse Escherichia coli extracellularly. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 110: 1627-1635.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  57. Zampara A, Sørensen MCH, Grimon D, Antenucci F, Vitt AR, Bortolaia V, et al. 2020. Exploiting phage receptor binding proteins to enable endolysins to kill Gram-negative bacteria. Sci. Rep. 10: 12087.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  58. Plançon L, Janmot C, le Maire M, Desmadril M, Bonhivers M, Letellier L, et al. 2002. Characterization of a high-affinity complex between the bacterial outer membrane protein FhuA and the phage T5 protein pb5. J. Mol. Biol. 318: 557-569.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  59. Mozafari MR, Johnson C, Hatziantoniou S, Demetzos C. 2008. Nanoliposomes and their applications in food nanotechnology. J. Liposome Res. 18: 309-327.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  60. Mozafari MR, Flanagan J, Matia-Merino L, Awati A, Singh H. 2010. Recent trends in the lipid-based nanoencapsulation of antioxidants and their role in foods. J. Sci. Food Agric. 86: 2038-2045.
    CrossRef
  61. Alhajlan M, Alhariri M, Omri A. 2013. Efficacy and safety of liposomal clarithromycin and its effect on Pseudomonas aeruginosa virulence factors. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 57: 2694-2704.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  62. Solleti VS, Alhariri M, Halwani M, Omri A. 2015. Antimicrobial properties of liposomal azithromycin for Pseudomonas infections in cystic fibrosis patients. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 70: 784-796.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  63. Rajendran V, Rohra S, Raza M, Hasan GM, Dutt S, Ghosh PC. 2015. Stearylamine liposomal delivery of monensin in combination with free artemisinin eliminates blood stages of Plasmodium falciparum in culture and P. berghei infection in murine malaria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 60: 1304-1318.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  64. Bai J, Yang E, Chang PS, Ryu S. 2019. Preparation and characterization of endolysin-containing liposomes and evaluation of their antimicrobial activities against gram-negative bacteria. Enzyme Microb Technol. 128: 40-48.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  65. Kaur J, Kour A, Panda JJ, Harjai K, Chhibber S. 2020. Exploring endolysin-loaded alginate-chitosan nanoparticles as future remedy for staphylococcal infections. AAPS PharmSciTech. 21: 233.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  66. Abouhmad A, Dishisha T, Amin MA, Hatti-Kaul R. 2017. Immobilization to positively charged cellulose nanocrystals enhances the antibacterial activity and stability of hen egg white and T4 lysozyme. Biomacromolecules 18: 1600-1608.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  67. Agnihotri SA, Mallikarjuna NN, Aminabhavi TM. 2004. Recent advances on chitosan-based micro- and nanoparticles in drug delivery. J. Control Release 100: 5-28.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  68. Ragelle H, Vandermeulen G, Préat V. 2013. Chitosan-based siRNA delivery systems. J. Control Release. 172: 207-218.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  69. Gondil VS, Dube T, Panda JJ, Yennamalli RM, Harjai K, Chhibber S. 2020. Comprehensive evaluation of chitosan nanoparticle based phage lysin delivery system; a novel approach to counter S. pneumoniae infections. Int. J. Pharm. 573: 118850.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  70. Vaara, M. 1992. Agents that increase the permeability of the outer membrane. Microbiol. Rev. 56: 395-411.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  71. Briers Y, Walmagh M, Lavigne R. 2011. Use of bacteriophage endolysin EL188 and outer membrane permeabilizers against Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J. Appl. Microbiol. 110: 778-785.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  72. Lim JA, Shin H, Heu S, Ryu S. 2014. Exogenous lytic activity of SPN9CC endolysin against gram-negative bacteria. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 24: 803-811.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  73. Walmagh M, Boczkowska B, Grymonprez B, Briers Y, Drulis-Kawa Z, Lavigne R. 2013. Characterization of five novel endolysins from Gram-negative infecting bacteriophages. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 97: 4369-4375.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  74. Oliveira H, Thiagarajan V, Walmagh M, Sillankorva S, Lavigne R, Neves-Petersen MT, et al. 2014. A thermostable Salmonella phage endolysin, Lys68, with broad bactericidal properties against gram-negative pathogens in presence of weak acids. PLoS One 9: e108376.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  75. Oliveira H, Vilas Boas D, Mesnage S, Kluskens LD, Lavigne R, Sillankorva S, et al. 2016. Structural and enzymatic characterization of ABgp46, a novel phage endolysin with broad anti-Gram-negative bacterial activity. Front. Microbiol. 7: 208.
    CrossRef