Antimicrobial Peptides From Amphibian Skin as Potential Therapeutics

Article Sidebar

Full Text PDF
Published: 2026-05-14
DOI: https://doi.org/10.61919/rbej1t38
Keywords:
Antimicrobial peptides; amphibian skin secretion; multidrug-resistant bacteria; MRSA; ESBL; carbapenem resistance; RP-HPLC; MIC; biofilm inhibition; Sindh Pakistan

Main Article Content

Bisma
Microbiologist, Rehmat E Shereen Industry, Karachi, Pakistan
Muhammad Owais Khan
PhD Zoology, Abdul Wali Khan University, Mardan, Pakistan
Dr. Usman Siddiq
M.Phil in Animal Nutrition, Cholistan University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Bahawalpur, Pakistan ORCID: 0009-0004-9679-6898
Afshan Pervaiz
PhD Bioscience, Mohammad Ali Jinnah University, Karachi, Pakistan
Syed Hasnain Ul Haque
Doctor of Veterinary Medicine, University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore, Pakistan
Mehwish Imtiaz
PharmD, Pharmacist, University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore, Pakistan ORCID: 0000-0003-3483-5690

Abstract

Background: Multidrug-resistant bacterial infections are a growing challenge in tertiary-care hospitals, particularly where antimicrobial pressure is high and treatment options are limited. Amphibian skin secretions contain antimicrobial peptides that may provide novel leads for anti-infective development. Objective: This study aimed to isolate peptide-containing fractions from amphibian skin secretions and evaluate their in vitro antibacterial, antibiofilm, safety, and stability profiles against multidrug-resistant clinical isolates. Methods: An experimental laboratory-based study was conducted using 87 non-duplicate multidrug-resistant isolates, including MRSA, ESBL-producing Escherichia coli, ESBL-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae, carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii. Amphibian skin secretions were processed into crude extract and purified by RP-HPLC to obtain two active fractions, AMP-1 and AMP-2. Antibacterial activity was assessed using MIC and MBC testing, time–kill kinetics, biofilm inhibition and disruption assays, hemolysis testing, mammalian-cell viability screening, and short-term serum stability assessment. Results: AMP-1 showed the strongest antibacterial profile, with median MICs of 4 µg/mL against MRSA, 8 µg/mL against ESBL-producing E. coli, and 16 µg/mL against carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa. MBCs were generally one dilution above MIC values. AMP-1 produced concentration-dependent killing against MRSA, inhibited biofilm formation more effectively than it disrupted mature biofilm, and showed lower hemolysis than AMP-2 at matched concentrations. AMP-1 retained 76% activity after 4 hours in 25% serum, compared with 68% for AMP-2. Conclusion: Amphibian-derived AMP fractions, particularly AMP-1, demonstrated promising in vitro activity and preliminary selectivity against MDR pathogens, supporting further peptide characterization, optimization, formulation development, and preclinical validation

Article Details

Issue

Vol. 4 No. 9 (2026): Volume 4, Issue 9 (May 2026)

Section

Articles
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

1.
Bisma, Muhammad Owais Khan, Dr. Usman Siddiq, Afshan Pervaiz, Syed Hasnain Ul Haque, Mehwish Imtiaz. Antimicrobial Peptides From Amphibian Skin as Potential Therapeutics. JHWCR [Internet]. 2026 May 14 [cited 2026 May 15];4(9):1-11. Available from: https://jhwcr.com/index.php/jhwcr/article/view/1544

References

1. Rollins-Smith LA. The importance of antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) in amphibian skin defense. Dev Comp Immunol. 2023;142:104657. doi:10.1016/j.dci.2023.104657.

2. Chen X, Lin H, Zhang Y, et al. Peptides isolated from amphibian skin secretions with emphasis on antimicrobial peptides. Toxins (Basel). 2022;14(10):722. doi:10.3390/toxins14100722.

3. Xuan J, Feng W, Wang J, et al. Antimicrobial peptides for combating drug-resistant bacterial infections. Drug Resist Updat. 2023;100954. doi:10.1016/j.drup.2023.100954.

4. Wiegand I, Hilpert K, Hancock REW. Agar and broth dilution methods to determine the MIC of antimicrobial substances. Nat Protoc. 2008;3:163-175. doi:10.1038/nprot.2007.521.

5. Magiorakos AP, Srinivasan A, Carey RB, Carmeli Y, Falagas ME, Giske CG, et al. Multidrug-resistant, extensively drug-resistant and pandrug-resistant bacteria: an international expert proposal for interim standard definitions. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2012;18(3):268-281. doi:10.1111/j.1469-0691.2011.03570.x.

6. Zasloff M. Antimicrobial peptides of multicellular organisms. Nature. 2002;415(6870):389-395. doi:10.1038/415389a.

7. Zasloff M. Magainins, a class of antimicrobial peptides from Xenopus skin. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1987;84(15):5449-5453. doi:10.1073/pnas.84.15.5449.

8. Hancock REW, Sahl HG. Antimicrobial and host-defense peptides as new anti-infective therapeutic strategies. Nat Biotechnol. 2006;24(12):1551-1557. doi:10.1038/nbt1267.

9. Brogden KA. Antimicrobial peptides: pore formers or metabolic inhibitors in bacteria? Nat Rev Microbiol. 2005;3(3):238-250. doi:10.1038/nrmicro1098.

10. Conlon JM. Structural diversity and species distribution of host-defense peptides in frog skin secretions. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2011;68(13):2303-2315. doi:10.1007/s00018-011-0720-8.

11. Mukhopadhyay S, Prasad ASB, Mehta CH, Nayak UY. Antimicrobial peptide polymers: no escape to ESKAPE pathogens—a review. World J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2020;36(9):131. doi:10.1007/s11274-020-02907-1.

12. D’Andrea LD, Romanelli A. Temporins: multifunctional peptides from frog skin. Amino Acids. 2023;55:123-134. doi:10.1007/s00726-023-03210-z.

13. Yin S, Wang Y, Yang X. Amphibian-derived wound healing peptides: chemical treasure trove. Front Pharmacol. 2023;14:1120228. doi:10.3389/fphar.2023.1120228.

14. Pletzer D, Hancock REW. Antibiofilm peptides: potential as broad-spectrum agents. J Bacteriol. 2016;198(19):2572-2578. doi:10.1128/JB.00017-16.

15. Dostert M, Trimble MJ, Hancock REW. Antibiofilm peptides: overcoming biofilm-related treatment failure. RSC Adv. 2021;11:2718-2728. doi:10.1039/D0RA09593J.