Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Research Articles

Vol. 12 No. 2 (2025)

Evaluation of the therapeutic potentials of natural compounds against Eimeria tenella hexokinase for poultry coccidiosis: bioinformatics and in-silico study

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.2972
Submitted
22 September 2023
Published
01-04-2025 — Updated on 13-04-2025
Versions

Abstract

Eimeria tenella, the causative agent of coccidiosis infection, is primarily found in poultry intestines and is recognized by the formation of clotted, red droppings. It has been found that because chickens have developed a resistance to anticoccidial medications and vaccines, their use alone is no longer as effective. But as a result, researchers have been looking for different treatment approaches to manage this illness and natural products have emerged as interesting possibilities. We used binding energy studies and molecular dynamics modeling to determine the mechanistic inhibitory capability of 5 natural substances against hexokinase (HK). Comparing CPD4 (Zinc 000002111835) to other compounds, the results showed that it had the highest binding activity, with a total binding energy of -32 kcal/mol. The PRED method discovered key CPD4 moieties as well as a number of chemical interactions, including hydrogen bonds, pi-alkyl bonds and pi-anion bonds, that are important to its binding ability. As demonstrated by their consistent complementary interactions over the course of the simulation, PRO160, PHE159, SER158 and ILE240 were important contributors to CPD4's effective binding activity. We suggest CPD4 as a possible lead molecule based on this study in order to address the shortcomings of the available treatment choices and encourage more experimental research towards the development of anticoccidial medications.

References

  1. Chapman HD, Barta JR, Blake D, Gruber A, Jenkins M, Smith NC, et al. A selective review of advances in coccidiosis research. Advances in Parasitology. 2013;83:93-171. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-407705-8.00002-1
  2. Dalloul RA, Lillehoj HS. Poultry coccidiosis: Recent advancements in control measures and vaccine development. Expert Rev Vaccines. 2006;5(1):143-63. https://doi.org/10.1586/14760584.5.1.143
  3. Allen PC, Fetterer RH. Recent advances in biology and immunobiology of Eimeria species and in diagnosis and control of infection with these coccidian parasites of poultry. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2002;15(1):58-65. https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.15.1.58-65.2002
  4. Noack S, Chapman HD, Selzer PM. Anticoccidial drugs of the livestock industry. Parasitol Res. 2019;118(7):2009-26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00436-019-06343-5
  5. Muthamilselvan T, Kuo TF, Wu YC, Yang WC. Herbal remedies for coccidiosis control: A review of plants, compounds, and anticoccidial actions. Evidence-based Complement Altern Med. 2016;2016. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/2657981
  6. Schmid-Hempel P. Immune defence, parasite evasion strategies and their relevance for “macroscopic phenomena” such as virulence. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 2009;364(1513):85-98. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2008.0157
  7. Cobaxin-Cárdenas ME. Natural compounds as an alternative to control farm diseases: Avian coccidiosis. Farm Anim Dis Recent Omi Trends New Strateg Treat. 2018; https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72638
  8. Sun M, Liao S, Zhang L, Wu C, Qi N, Lv M, et al. Molecular and biochemical characterization of Eimeria tenella hexokinase. Parasitol Res [Internet]. 2016;115(9):3425-33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00436-016-5104-4
  9. Atanasov AG, Waltenberger B, Pferschy-Wenzig EM, Linder T, Wawrosch C, Uhrin P, et al. Discovery and resupply of pharmacologically active plant-derived natural products: A review. Biotechnol Adv [Internet]. 2015;33(8):1582-614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2015.08.001
  10. Aljedaie MM, Alam P, Al-Malki ES. Prediction of novel natural inhibitors of avian coccidia (Eimeria tenella) through molecular docking. Trop J Pharm Res. 2021;20(7):1441–45. https://doi.org/10.4314/tjpr.v20i7.17
  11. Enrico C. Nanotechnology-based drug delivery of natural compounds and phytochemicals for the treatment of cancer and other diseases. Studies in natural products chemistry. 2019;62:91-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-64185-4.00003-4
  12. Forni C, Facchiano F, Bartoli M, Pieretti S, Facchiano A, D'Arcangelo D, et al. Beneficial role of phytochemicals on oxidative stress and age?related diseases. BioMed research international.2019;2019(1). https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/8748253
  13. Maruca A, Catalano R, Bagetta D, Mesiti F, Ambrosio FA, Romeo I, et al. The Mediterranean Diet as source of bioactive compounds with multi-targeting anti-cancer profile. European Journal of Medicinal Chemistry. 2019;181.
  14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmech.2019.111579 .
  15. Irwin JJ, Shoichet BK. for Virtual Screening. 2006;45(1):177-82. https://doi.org/10.1021/ci049714+
  16. Omolabi KF, Iwuchukwu EA, Agoni C, Olotu FA, Soliman ME. A probable means to an end: exploring P131 pharmacophoric scaffold to identify potential inhibitors of Cryptosporidium parvum inosine monophosphate dehydrogenase. Journal of Molecular Modeling. 2021;27:1-4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00894-020-04663-3
  17. Allouche A. Software News and Updates Gabedit - A graphical user interface for computational chemistry softwares. J Comput Chem. 2012;32:174-82. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcc.21600
  18. Pettersen EF, Goddard TD, Huang CC, Couch GS, Greenblatt DM, Meng EC, et al. UCSF Chimera - A visualization system for exploratory research and analysis. J Comput Chem. 2004;25(13):1605-12. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcc.20084
  19. Case DA, Walker RC, Cheatham TE, Simmerling C, Roitberg A, Merz KM, et al. Amber 18. Univ California, San Fr [Internet]. 2018.
  20. Maier JA, Martinez C, Kasavajhala K, Wickstrom L, et al. ff14SB: Improving the Accuracy of Protein Side Chain and Backbone Parameters from ff99SB. J Chem Theory Comput. 2015;11(8):3696-713. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.5b00255
  21. Case DA, Cheatham TE, Darden T, Gohlke H, Luo R, Merz KM, et al. The Amber biomolecular simulation programs. J Comput Chem. 2005;26(16):1668-88. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcc.20290
  22. Jorgensen WL, Chandrasekhar J, Madura JD, Impey RW, Klein ML. Comparison of simple potential functions for simulating liquid water. J Chem Phys. 1983;79(2):926-35. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.445869
  23. Berendsen HJC, Postma JPM, Van Gunsteren WF, Dinola A, Haak JR. Molecular dynamics with coupling to an external bath. J Chem Phys. 1984;81(8):3684-90. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.448118
  24. Roe DR, Cheatham TE. PTRAJ and CPPTRAJ: Software for processing and analysis of molecular dynamics trajectory data. J Chem Theory Comput. 2013;9(7):3084-95. https://doi.org/10.1021/ct400341p
  25. Seifert E. OriginPro 9.1: Scientific data analysis and graphing software - Software review. J Chem Inf Model. 2014;54(5):1552. https://doi.org/10.1021/ci500161d
  26. Kollman PA, Massova I, Reyes C, Kuhn B, Huo S, Chong L, et al. Calculating structures and free energies of complex molecules: Combining molecular mechanics and continuum models. Acc Chem Res. 2000;33(12):889-97. https://doi.org/10.1021/ar000033j
  27. Hou T, Wang J, Li Y, Wang W. Assessing the Performance of the MM_PBSA and MM_GBSA Methods. 1. The Accuracy.pdf. J Chem Inf Model. 2011;51:69-82. https://doi.org/10.1021/ci100275a
  28. Genheden S, Ryde U. The MM/PBSA and MM/GBSA methods to estimate ligand-binding affinities. Expert Opin Drug Discov. 2015;10(5):449-61. https://doi.org/10.1517/17460441.2015.1032936
  29. Chaudhary N, Aparoy P. Deciphering the mechanism behind the varied binding activities of COXIBs through Molecular Dynamic Simulations, MM-PBSA binding energy calculations and per-residue energy decomposition studies. J Biomol Struct Dyn. 2017;35(4):868-82. https://doi.org/10.1080/07391102.2016.1165736
  30. Gupta A, Chaudhary N, Aparoy P. MM-PBSA and per-residue decomposition energy studies on 7-Phenyl-imidazoquinolin-4(5H)-one derivatives: Identification of crucial site points at microsomal prostaglandin E synthase-1 (mPGES-1) active site. Int J Biol Macromol [Internet]. 2018;119:352-9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.07.050
  31. Yang T, Wu JC, Yan C, Wang Y, Luo R, Gonzales MB, et al. Virtual screening using molecular simulations. Proteins Struct Funct Bioinforma. 2011;79(6):1940–51. https://doi.org/10.1002/prot.23018
  32. Weis A, Katebzadeh K, Söderhjelm P, Nilsson I, Ryde U. Ligand affinities predicted with the MM/PBSA method: Dependence on the simulation method and the force field. J Med Chem. 2006;49(22):6596-606. https://doi.org/10.1021/jm0608210
  33. Woods CJ, Malaisree M, Michel J, Long B, et al. Rapid decomposition and visualisation of protein-ligand binding free energies by residue and by water. Faraday Discuss [Internet]. 2014;169:477-99. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1039/C3FD00125C

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.