| Title |
Gallic acid conjugated with gold nanoparticles: antibacterial activity and mechanism of action on foodborne pathogens
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s109795 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Narintorn Rattanata, Sompong Klaynongsruang, Chanvit Leelayuwat, Temduang Limpaiboon, Aroonlug Lulitanond, Patcharee Boonsiri, Sirinart Chio-Srichan, Siriwat Soontaranon, Supagorn Rugmai, Jureerut Daduang |
| Abstract |
Foodborne pathogens, including Plesiomonas shigelloides and Shigella flexneri B, are the major cause of diarrheal endemics worldwide. Antibiotic drug resistance is increasing. Therefore, bioactive compounds with antibacterial activity, such as gallic acid (GA), are needed. Gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) are used as drug delivery agents. This study aimed to conjugate and characterize AuNP-GA and to evaluate the antibacterial activity. AuNP was conjugated with GA, and the core-shell structures were characterized by small-angle X-ray scattering and transmission electron microscopy. Antibacterial activity of AuNP-GA against P. shigelloides and S. flexneri B was evaluated by well diffusion method. AuNP-GA bactericidal mechanism was elucidated by Fourier transform infrared microspectroscopic analysis. The results of small-angle X-ray scattering showed that AuNP-GA conjugation was successful. Antibacterial activity of GA against both bacteria was improved by conjugation with AuNP because the minimum inhibitory concentration value of AuNP-GA was significantly decreased (P<0.0001) compared to that of GA. Fourier transform infrared analysis revealed that AuNP-GA resulted in alterations of lipids, proteins, and nucleic acids at the bacterial cell membrane. Our findings show that AuNP-GA has potential for further application in biomedical sciences. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 75% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 77 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 10% |
| Researcher | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 33 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 8% |
| Chemistry | 6 | 8% |
| Materials Science | 4 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 36 | 47% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 25 August 2016.
All research outputs
#16,046,765
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#1,887
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#215,990
of 367,266 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#65
of 121 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 367,266 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 121 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.