↓ Skip to main content

β-Lactam antibiotic-degrading enzymes from non-pathogenic marine organisms: a potential threat to human health

Overview of attention for article published in JBIC Journal of Biological Inorganic Chemistry, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
β-Lactam antibiotic-degrading enzymes from non-pathogenic marine organisms: a potential threat to human health
Published in
JBIC Journal of Biological Inorganic Chemistry, March 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00775-015-1250-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Manfredi Miraula, Jacob J. Whitaker, Gerhard Schenk, Nataša Mitić

Abstract

Metallo-β-lactamases (MBLs) are a family of Zn(II)-dependent enzymes that inactivate most of the commonly used β-lactam antibiotics. They have emerged as a major threat to global healthcare. Recently, we identified two novel MBL-like proteins, Maynooth IMipenemase-1 (MIM-1) and Maynooth IMipenemase-2 (MIM-2), in the marine organisms Novosphingobium pentaromativorans and Simiduia agarivorans, respectively. Here, we demonstrate that MIM-1 and MIM-2 have catalytic activities comparable to those of known MBLs, but from the pH dependence of their catalytic parameters it is evident that both enzymes differ with respect to their mechanisms, with MIM-1 preferring alkaline and MIM-2 acidic conditions. Both enzymes require Zn(II) but activity can also be reconstituted with other metal ions including Co(II), Mn(II), Cu(II) and Ca(II). Importantly, the substrate preference of MIM-1 and MIM-2 appears to be influenced by their metal ion composition. Since neither N. pentaromativorans nor S. agarivorans are human pathogens, the precise biological role(s) of MIM-1 and MIM-2 remains to be established. However, due to the similarity of at least some of their in vitro functional properties to those of known MBLs, MIM-1 and MIM-2 may provide essential structural insight that may guide the design of as of yet elusive clinically useful MBL inhibitors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 20%
Student > Postgraduate 3 15%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 10%
Professor 2 10%
Other 4 20%
Unknown 3 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 20%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Social Sciences 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 March 2015.
All research outputs
#18,565,966
of 23,842,189 outputs
Outputs from JBIC Journal of Biological Inorganic Chemistry
#515
of 664 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#181,534
of 263,520 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JBIC Journal of Biological Inorganic Chemistry
#6
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,842,189 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 664 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,520 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.