Review

Novel antimicrobial strategies against infections

  • The rapid emergence and global spread of multi-drug resistant (MDR) bacteria have rendered many conventional antibiotics ineffective, posing an unprecedented challenge to public health and modern medicine. Resolving this crisis requires innovative treatment strategies that can effectively address the root causes and bring new hope to public health and modern medicine. The escalation of microbial infections and the concurrent rise in antibiotic resistance pose a formidable challenge to global health. Amidst the dwindling efficacy of traditional antibiotics, antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) have emerged as promising therapeutic agents due to their broad-spectrum activity and unique mechanisms of action that offer potential solutions to antibiotic resistance. In this review, we aim to emphasize the significant progress made in the field of antimicrobial peptide research. We particularly emphasize the novel and creative strategies adopted in the key aspects of antimicrobial peptides, namely their design, optimization, and delivery. By doing so, we help shape the future of antimicrobial therapy with innovative methods and help combat infections. We adopt a novel perspective by integrating insights into antibiotics, antimicrobial peptides mechanisms of action with advanced strategies in peptide engineering, and delivery systems, highlighting synergies between antimicrobial peptides and conventional antibiotics. Unlike other researchers, we provide a forward-looking discussion on the translational challenges and opportunities in AMP-based therapies and display it in tabular form, offering actionable guidance for future research and development.

    Citation: Yue Xu, Fulei Zhang, Kairui Zhu, Ying Liu, Xuejuan Wang, Yunqi Ma. Novel antimicrobial strategies against infections[J]. AIMS Bioengineering, 2025, 12(1): 22-49. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2025002

    Related Papers:

    [1] Ahmed Alamer, Hassan Zafar, Muhammad Javaid . Study of modified prism networks via fractional metric dimension. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(5): 10864-10886. doi: 10.3934/math.2023551
    [2] Fozia Bashir Farooq, Furqan Ahmad, Muhammad Kamran Jamil, Aisha Javed, Nouf Abdulrahman Alqahtani . Uniquely identifying vertices and edges of a heptagonal snake graph using distance formulas. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(6): 15069-15087. doi: 10.3934/math.2025676
    [3] Bana Al Subaiei, Ahlam AlMulhim, Abolape Deborah Akwu . Vertex-edge perfect Roman domination number. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(9): 21472-21483. doi: 10.3934/math.20231094
    [4] Ali N. A. Koam . Metric based resolvability of cycle related graphs. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(4): 9911-9925. doi: 10.3934/math.2024485
    [5] Dalal Awadh Alrowaili, Uzma Ahmad, Saira Hameeed, Muhammad Javaid . Graphs with mixed metric dimension three and related algorithms. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(7): 16708-16723. doi: 10.3934/math.2023854
    [6] Maryam Salem Alatawi, Ali Ahmad, Ali N. A. Koam, Sadia Husain, Muhammad Azeem . Computing vertex resolvability of benzenoid tripod structure. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 6971-6983. doi: 10.3934/math.2022387
    [7] Syed Ahtsham Ul Haq Bokhary, Zill-e-Shams, Abdul Ghaffar, Kottakkaran Sooppy Nisar . On the metric basis in wheels with consecutive missing spokes. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(6): 6221-6232. doi: 10.3934/math.2020400
    [8] Ali N. A. Koam, Sikander Ali, Ali Ahmad, Muhammad Azeem, Muhammad Kamran Jamil . Resolving set and exchange property in nanotube. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(9): 20305-20323. doi: 10.3934/math.20231035
    [9] Chenggang Huo, Humera Bashir, Zohaib Zahid, Yu Ming Chu . On the 2-metric resolvability of graphs. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(6): 6609-6619. doi: 10.3934/math.2020425
    [10] Mohra Zayed, Ali Ahmad, Muhammad Faisal Nadeem, Muhammad Azeem . The comparative study of resolving parameters for a family of ladder networks. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(9): 16569-16589. doi: 10.3934/math.2022908
  • The rapid emergence and global spread of multi-drug resistant (MDR) bacteria have rendered many conventional antibiotics ineffective, posing an unprecedented challenge to public health and modern medicine. Resolving this crisis requires innovative treatment strategies that can effectively address the root causes and bring new hope to public health and modern medicine. The escalation of microbial infections and the concurrent rise in antibiotic resistance pose a formidable challenge to global health. Amidst the dwindling efficacy of traditional antibiotics, antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) have emerged as promising therapeutic agents due to their broad-spectrum activity and unique mechanisms of action that offer potential solutions to antibiotic resistance. In this review, we aim to emphasize the significant progress made in the field of antimicrobial peptide research. We particularly emphasize the novel and creative strategies adopted in the key aspects of antimicrobial peptides, namely their design, optimization, and delivery. By doing so, we help shape the future of antimicrobial therapy with innovative methods and help combat infections. We adopt a novel perspective by integrating insights into antibiotics, antimicrobial peptides mechanisms of action with advanced strategies in peptide engineering, and delivery systems, highlighting synergies between antimicrobial peptides and conventional antibiotics. Unlike other researchers, we provide a forward-looking discussion on the translational challenges and opportunities in AMP-based therapies and display it in tabular form, offering actionable guidance for future research and development.



    Combinatorics is the study of how items are arranged by predetermined principles. Combinatorial approaches are required to count, enumerate, or describe potential solutions. Many difficult real-world situations require finding an optimal solution in a finite solution space. The literature contains a large number of issues that could be solved in polynomial time, even though some practical problems, such as determining the shortest or cheapest roundtrips, internet data packet routing, planning, scheduling, and timetabling, appear to be NP-complete. Several combinatorial strategies can be used to achieve this, including metric dimension (MD), fault-tolerant MD, and DMD. The networks considered in this study are simple (no multiple loops permitted), finite (both edge and vertex sets are finite), linked (a path exists between any two pairs of vertices), and undirected (the edges are not oriented). Consider a network G of order n with the edge set EG and vertex set VG. For a vertex νVG, the representation (l-tuple) r(ν)=(dτ|1τl), where dτ=dτ(ν,ντ), is said to be the distance vector of the vertex ν. The distance vector between two vertices νu could be the same. In this case, the question of determining which vertices have unique distance vectors arises. This difficulty led to the definition of the resolving sets, introduced by Slater [1] in 1975 and Harary and Melter [2] in 1976.

    Definition 1.1. 1) The vertex xVG determines (resolves) the vertices v,wVG if d(v,x)d(w,x).

    2) Let WGVG, where WG={yτ|1τl};(ln) is an ordered set and zVG, then the notation r(z|WG) is the distance vector of the vertex z in association with WG is the l-tuple (d(z,yτ))lτ=1, also called the vector of metric coordinates.

    3) The set WG is said to be a resolving set for network G, if the l-tuple (d(z,yτ))lτ=1 is unique with respect to z.

    4) A metric basis of network G is a resolving set with minimal number of entries. The number of entries in a metric basis is denoted by dim(G) and is called the MD of G.

    The MD has a wide range of potential applications in science, sociology, and engineering. In this context, we will explore the diverse applications of the MD within different scientific fields. Several disciplines, such as telecommunications [3], establishing routing protocols geographically [4], combinatorial optimization [5], and robotics [6] have benefited from the rise and diversity of MD applications. Another area where the MD has significant implications is network discovery and verification [3]. Many applications in chemistry are derived from the vertex-edge relation in networks and its equivalence to the atom and bond relation [7]. Many strategies for the Mastermind [8] games are built using the resolving sets, and the MD of hamming networks is linked to various coin-weighing difficulties explained in [9,10]. It is natural to investigate the mathematical features of this parameter due to its significance in other scientific fields. And after that, we look at some studies on the mathematical importance of this graph-theoretic parameter.

    Several network families of mathematical importance have been studied from the perspective of MD. The field of MD has seen significant advancements, which we will discuss below. The chorded cycle, kayak paddle networks [11], and Mobius ladders [12] are examples of families for which MD has been estimated. Bailey and others have examined the MD of specific families of distance-regular networks, such as Grassmann networks [13], Kneser networks, and Johnson networks [14].

    Cayley networks and Cayley digraphs, which are examples of networks generated by finite groups with group-theoretic importance, have been studied from the MD perspective [15,16]. There has also been research into the MD and resolving sets of product networks, such as the categorical product of networks [17] and the cartesian product of graphs [18]. Kratica et al. [19] (and, respectively, Imran et al. [20]) investigated the MD of rotationally symmetric convex polytopes (and, respectively, convex polytopes created by wheel-related networks). Siddiqui et al. [21] investigated certain infinite families derived from wheel networks for the MD problem.

    Burdett et al. [22] determined various domination numbers for flower snarks, including independent domination, 2-domination, total domination, connected domination, upper domination, secure domination, and weak Roman domination numbers. In [23], the exact results of the mixed MD on two special classes of networks, namely flower snarks and wheel-related networks, were presented. Another study by Girisha et al. [24] characterized the MD and distance matrix of flower snark and sunflower networks. Additionally, due to computational complexity in finding exact values, Liu et al. provided bounds for the partition dimension of certain convex polytope structures in their work [25]. Lastly, Nawaz et al. [26] discussed the edge MD of various structures of benzodiazepines, which are types of drugs used for the treatment of depression.

    Caceres et al. [27] responded to the question of whether the MD is a finite number. They demonstrated this by constructing infinite families of networks having infinite MDs. The computational difficulty of the MD problem was addressed by Garey and Johnson [28], just like many other graph-theoretic characteristics. The bounds of the MD have been examined for generalized Petersen networks by Shao et al. (refer to [29]). All connected networks possessing MDs n1, n2, and 1 were determined by Chartrand et al. [7]. Raza et al. [30] examined the fault-tolerant MD of infinite sets of regular networks, categorizing them accordingly. Baca et al. [31] and Tomescu et al. [32] studied the concept of resolving sets for the regular bipartite networks and the family of necklace networks, respectively. For more details, see [33,34].

    MD and its associated parameters are widely used among researchers today because of the relevance of MD in the identification of nodes in networks. The concept of the DRS and DMD of the network, which is a generalization of the MD of the network, is a distinctive and significant parameter. The term "DRS" was defined by Caceres et al. [18] as follows:

    Definition 1.2. 1) The vertices e1,e2G (where |G|2) are said to doubly resolve the vertices f1,f2 of network G if d(e1,f1)d(e1,f2)d(e2,f1)d(e2,f2).

    2) An ordered set DG={eτ|1τl} of G is a DRS of G if there does not exist a pair of vertices in G that has the same difference in their associated metric coordinates with respect to DG.

    3) In other words, all coordinates of the vector r(f1|DG)r(f2|DG) cannot be the same for any pair of distinct vertices f1,f2VG. i.e. r(f1|DG)r(f2|DG)γI, where I is the unit vector (1,1,,1) and γ is an integer.

    A DRS having a minimal cardinal number is called a MDRS. The cardinal number of an MDRS is the DMD of G, denoted by ψ(G). Moreover, a DRS is a resolving set as well, and ψ(G)dim(G). It was shown in [35] (and, respectively, in [6]) that finding ψ(G) (and, respectively, dim(G)) is an NP-hard task. The task of identifying MDRSs for necklace networks and certain convex polytopes was first addressed in [36] and [19]. Furthermore, authors in [37,38] demonstrated that the DMD remains constant for certain convex polytope structures. For various families of Harary networks, Ahmad et al. calculated the MDRSs (see [39] for more information).

    In [40], it was shown that the dim(G) and ψ(G) of some families of circulant networks were the same in all cases. The problem of determining the MDRS is discussed for many network families; for example, the MDRSs of prisms and Hamming networks were investigated in [41] and [42], respectively. Chen and Wang [43] conducted a study to identify the MDRSs for trees, cycles, wheels, and k-edge-augmented trees. In another study [44], Chen et al. were the first to present explicit approximations of upper and lower bounds for the MDRS problem.

    An investigation into the MDRSs and MD of certain network families was conducted by Liu et al. [45]. In a recent study, Ahmad et al. [46] investigated the MDRSs for the chordal ring networks. Moreover, in [47], the MDRSs of layer-sun networks and their line networks have been explored in detail. The DMD and MDRSs for certain classes of convex polytopes were found by Pan et al. [48]. Jannesari [49] characterized all networks G having the DMD 2 by using 2-connected subgraphs of network G. Recently, the generalized solutions for the DRS problem of several families of networks were found by Ahmad et al. [50].

    The reason for studying doubly resolving sets (DRSs) is their potential to improve the accuracy and efficiency of source detection in different network scenarios. Our study aimed to explore the theoretical principles of certain network properties using the flower snark network as a model due to its distinct and well-defined structural characteristics. The results of the study are significant as they present calculated double metric dimensions (DMDs) for complex network models such as flower snarks and quasi-flower snarks. These findings not only demonstrate the real-world application of DRSs in intricate networks but also provide valuable insights into their structural traits. This comprehension can guide future work in the theory of networks and its practical implementations, leading to more effective source detection techniques in various real-world networks.

    MDRSs play a crucial role in identifying diffusion sources in intricate networks. Locating the origins of an outbreak in such networks is an exciting yet challenging task. For instance, consider the scenario where the only available information about the epidemic is from a subset of nodes referred to as sensors. These sensors can indicate if and when they have been infected with the virus. The question then arises: What is the minimum number of sensors required to identify the source of the outbreak accurately? Fortunately, a well-known network feature called DMD offers a solution to this problem (for details, see [51,52]).

    Let us look at a few real-world instances. The DMD in an n-node star network is n1. DRSs cannot be formed from sets that do not include all of the external nodes. On the other hand, the DMD for a path network is 2. The two nodes, one at each end of the path, are sensors always sufficient to identify the source. Using these instances, it is clear that the DMD and the difficulty in finding the source largely depend on the network topology. A path-like network makes it far easier to find the source of an outbreak than a star-like network [52].

    The results on minimal resolving sets for the flower snark Jm and quasi-flower snarks Gm were determined by Imran et al. [53] and Naeem et al. [54] and are given in the following theorems:

    Theorem 1.3. [53] Let Jm be the flower snark. Then, for every odd positive integer m5, we have dim(Jm)=3.

    Theorem 1.4. [54] Let Gm be the quasi-flower snark. Then, for every positive integer m4, we have dim(Gm)={3,if m is odd4,otherwise.

    The results presented above determine the lower bound on the DMD of flower snarks Jm and quasi-flower snarks Gm. Following is how the main contribution of the article is structured:

    ● We compute the DMD for flower snarks Jm and quasi-flower snarks Gm in Sections 2 and 3.

    ● The utilization of the research in the context of the source of diffusion in a complex network is presented in Section 4.

    ● Finally, in Section 5, we demonstrate that the DMD for flower snarks depends on the order of the network, and the DMD for quasi-flower snarks is independent of the order of the network.

    In this section, we will concentrate on determining the DMD of flower snarks Jm.

    The flower snark Jm, depicted in Figure 1, is a cubic network comprising 4m vertices and 6m edges. The vertex set for the flower snarks Jm is VJm = {cτ,fτ,gτ,hτ: 0τm1}, and the edge set is EJm = {cτcτ+1,cτfτ,fτgτ,fτhτ,gτgτ+1,hτhτ+1: 0τm2} {cm1c0,cm1fm1,fm1gm1,fm1hm1,gm1g0,hm1h0,g0hm1,gm1h0}.

    Figure 1.  Flower snark J5.

    As shown in Figure 1, the inner cycle vertices are labeled as {cτ : 0τm1}, the set of central vertices are labeled as {fτ : 0τm1}, and the outer cycle vertices are labeled as {gτ : 0τm1} {hτ : 0τm1}.

    MDRSs for Jm are to be found in this section. It follows from Theorem 1.3 that ψ(Jm)3, for all m6. We shall also show, for all m6:

     ψ(Jm)={4,if m is odd;5,if m is even.

    Define the vertex subset Sτ(f0)={gVJm:d(f0,g)=τ}VJm having distance τ from f0. The Table 1 is a simple formulation for Sτ(f0) and will be used to compute the distances between each pair of vertices in VJm.

    Table 1.  Sτ(f0) for Jm.
    m τ Sτ(f0)
    1 {c0, g0, h0}
    2 {c1, cm1, g1, gm1, h1, hm1}
    3τm2 {cτ1, cmτ+1, fτ2, fmτ+2, gτ1, gmτ+1, hτ1, hmτ+1}
    even m+22 {cm2, fm22, fm+22, gm2, hm2}
    m+42 {fm2}
    odd m+12 {cm12, cm+12, fm32, fm+32, gm12, gm+12, hm12, hm+12}
    m+32 {fm12, fm+12}

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    The following facts can be demonstrated as a result of the symmetry of Jm, where m6:

    d(fτ,fυ)=d(f0,f|τυ|) if 0|τυ|m1; d(cτ,cυ)=d(f0,c|τυ|)1 if 0|τυ|m1;

    d(cτ,fυ)=d(f0,c|τυ|) if 0|τυ|m1;

    d(cτ,gυ)=d(cτ,hυ)=d(f0,c|τυ|)+1 if 0|τυ|m1;

    d(fτ,gυ)=d(fτ,hυ)=d(f0,g|τυ|) if 0|τυ|m1.

    If m is an odd integer, then

    d(gτ,hυ)={d(f0,c|τυ|)+1,if 0|τυ|m12;d(f0,c|τυ|)1,if m+12|τυ|m1.d(gτ,gυ)=d(hτ,hυ)={d(f0,g|τυ|)1,if 0|τυ|m12;d(f0,g|τυ|)+1,if m+12|τυ|m1.

    If m is an even integer, then

    d(gτ,hυ)={d(f0,c|τυ|)+1,if 0|τυ|m22;d(f0,c|τυ|)1,if m2|τυ|m1.d(gτ,gυ)=d(hτ,hυ)={d(f0,g|τυ|)1,if 0|τυ|m2;d(f0,g|τυ|)+1,if m+22|τυ|m1.

    Therefore, we can recalculate the distances between each pair of vertices in VJm if d(f0,g) is known for each gVJm.

    Lemma 2.1. For any even positive integer m6, ψ(Jm)>4.

    Proof. To prove the DMD ψ(Jm)>4, we must show that every subset DJmVJm of cardinality 4 is not a DRS for Jm. Table 2 demonstrates the non-doubly resolved pairs of vertices from the set VJm as well as all possible forms of subset DJm. Let us compute that any two vertices of the set {cτ,cυ,cω,f0;0τ<υ<ωm1} do not doubly resolve the vertices f0,g0. For example, it is clear that d(f0,f0)=0,d(f0,g0)=1. Now, for 0τm22,1υm22,2ωm22, we have

    Table 2.  Non-doubly resolving pairs of vertices for Jm, even positive integer m6.
    DJm Non-doubly resolved pairs
    {cτ,cυ,cω,f0}, 0τ<υ<ωm1 {f0,g0}
    {cτ,cυ,f0,fω}, 0τ<υm1, 1ωm1 {g0,h0}
    {cτ,f0,fυ,fω}, 0τm1, 1υ<ωm1 {g0,h0}
    {cτ,f0,fυ,gω} {cτ,f0,fυ,hω}, 0τm1, 1υm1, 0ωm22 {gm+2ω2,hm+2ω2}
    {cτ,f0,fυ,gω} {cτ,f0,fυ,hω}, 0τm1, 1υm1, m2ωm2 {g2ωm2,h2ωm2}
    {cτ,f0,fυ,gω} {cτ,f0,fυ,hω}, 0τm1, 1υm1, ω=m1 {gm22,hm22}
    {cτ,cυ,f0,gω}, 0τ<υm1, 0ωm22 {f0,h0}
    {cτ,cυ,f0,gω}, 0τ<υm1, m2ωm2 {g2ωm2,h2ωm2}
    {cτ,cυ,f0,gω}, 0τ<υm1, ω=m1 {f0,g0}
    {cτ,cυ,f0,hω}, 0τ<υm1, 0ωm22 {f0,g0}
    {cτ,cυ,f0,hω}, 0τ<υm1, m2ωm2 {g2ωm2,h2ωm2}
    {cτ,cυ,f0,hω}, 0τ<υm1, ω=m1 {f0,h0}
    {f0,fτ,fυ,fω}, 1τ<υ<ωm1 {c0,g0}
    {f0,gτ,gυ,hω}, 0τ<υm1, 0ωm1 {c0,f0}
    {f0,fτ,fυ,gω}, 1τ<υm1, 0ωm22 {c0,h0}
    {f0,fτ,fυ,gω}, 1τ<υm1, ω=m2 {g0,h0}
    {f0,fτ,fυ,gω}, 1τ<υm1, m+22ωm1 {c0,g0}
    {f0,fτ,fυ,hω}, 1τ<υm1, 0ωm22 {c0,g0}
    {f0,fτ,fυ,hω}, 1τ<υm1, ω=m2 {g0,h0}
    {f0,fτ,fυ,hω}, 1τ<υm1, m+22ωm1 {c0,h0}
    {f0,gτ,gυ,gω} {f0,hτ,hυ,hω}, 0τ<υ<ωm1 {c0,f0}
    {f0,gτ,hυ,hω}, 0τm1, 0υ<ωm1 {c0,f0}

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    d(cτ,f0)=d(f0,cτ)=τ+1,

    d(cτ,g0)=d(f0,cτ)+1=τ+2,

    d(cυ,f0)=d(f0,cυ)=υ+1,

    d(cυ,g0)=d(f0,cυ)+1=υ+2,

    d(cω,f0)=d(f0,cω)=ω+1,

    d(cω,g0)=d(f0,cω)+1=ω+2.

    Also, for m2τm3,m2υm2,m2ωm1, we have

    d(cτ,f0)=d(f0,cτ)=mτ+1,

    d(cτ,g0)=d(f0,cτ)+1=mτ+2,

    d(cυ,f0)=d(f0,cυ)=mυ+1,

    d(cυ,g0)=d(f0,cυ)+1=mυ+2,

    d(cω,f0)=d(f0,cω)=mω+1,

    d(cω,g0)=d(f0,cω)+1=mω+2.

    So, d(cτ,f0)d(cτ,g0)=d(cυ,f0)d(cυ,g0)=d(cω,f0)d(cω,g0)=d(f0,f0)d(f0,g0)=1, that is, the set {cτ,cυ,cω,f0;0τ<υ<ωm1} is not a DRS of Jm. Accordingly, we can investigate all the possible types of subset DJm shown in Table 2 and verify their associated non-doubly resolved pairs of vertices.

    Lemma 2.2. For any odd positive integer m6, ψ(Jm)>3.

    Proof. To prove the DMD ψ(Jm)>3, we must show that every subset DJmVJm of cardinality 3 is not a DRS for Jm. Table 3 demonstrates the non-doubly resolved pairs of vertices from the set VJm as well as all possible forms of subset DJm. Let us compute that any two vertices of the set {f0,gτ,hυ;0τ,υm1} do not doubly resolve the vertices c0,f0. For example, it is clear that d(c0,f0)=1,d(f0,f0)=0. Now, for 0τ,υm12, we have

    Table 3.  Non-doubly resolving pairs of vertices for Jm, odd positive integer m6.
    DJm Non-doubly resolved pairs
    {cτ,cυ,f0}, 0τ<υm1 {f0,g0}
    {cτ,f0,fυ}, 0τm1, 1υm1 {g0,h0}
    {f0,fτ,fυ}, 1τ<υm1 {c0,g0}
    {f0,fτ,gυ}, 1τm1, 0υm32 {c0,h0}
    {f0,fτ,gυ}, 1τm1, m12υm1 {cυ1,hυ1}
    {f0,fτ,hυ}, 1τm1, 0υm32 {c0,g0}
    {f0,fτ,hυ}, 1τm1, m12υm1 {cυ1,gυ1}
    {f0,gτ,gυ} {f0,hτ,hυ}, 0τ<υm1 {c0,f0}
    {f0,gτ,hυ}, 0τ,υm1 {c0,f0}

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    d(c0,gτ)=d(f0,cτ)+1=τ+2,

    d(f0,gτ)=d(f0,gτ)=τ+1,

    d(c0,hυ)=d(f0,cυ)+1=υ+2,

    d(f0,hυ)=d(f0,gυ)=υ+1.

    Also, for m+12τ,υm1, we have

    d(c0,gτ)=d(f0,cτ)+1=mτ+2,

    d(f0,gτ)=d(f0,gτ)=mτ+1,

    d(c0,hυ)=d(f0,cυ)+1=mυ+2,

    d(f0,hυ)=d(f0,gυ)=mυ+1.

    So, d(c0,gτ)d(f0,gτ)=d(c0,hυ)d(f0,hυ)=d(c0,f0)d(f0,f0)=1, that is, the set {f0,gτ,hυ;0τ,υm1} is not a DRS of Jm. Accordingly, we can investigate all the possible types of subset DJm shown in Table 3 and verify their associated non-doubly resolved pairs of vertices.

    Lemma 2.3. ψ(Jm)=5, even integers m6.

    Proof. It suffices to identify a DRS having order 5 to demonstrate that ψ(Jm)=5, if m6 is an even integer. Now, by using the sets Sτ(f0) from Table 1, the metric coordinate vectors are demonstrated in Table 4 for each vertex of Jm with respect to the set DJm={c0,c1,cm2,g0,gm1}.

    Table 4.  Metric coordinate vectors for Jm if m6 is even.
    τ Sτ(f0) DJm={c0,c1,cm2,g0,gm1}
    0 f0 (1,2,m+22,1,2)
    1 c0 (0,1,m2,2,3)
    g0 (2,3,m+42,0,3)
    h0 (2,3,m+42,2,1)
    2 c1 (1,0,m22,3,4)
    cm1 (1,2,m22,3,2)
    g1 (3,2,m+22,1,4)
    gm1 (3,4,m+22,3,0)
    h1 (3,2,m+22,3,2)
    hm1 (3,4,m+22,1,2)
    3τm2 cτ1 (τ1,τ2,m2τ+22,τ+1,τ+2)
    cmτ+1 (τ1,τ,m2τ+22,τ+1,τ)
    fτ2 (τ1,τ2,m2τ+62,τ1,τ)
    fmτ+2 ={(τ+1,τ,m2τ+62,τ1,τ+2), if τ<m2;(m+22,m2,3,m22,m2), if τ=m2.
    gmτ+1 (τ+1,τ+2,m2τ+62,τ+1,τ2)
    hτ1 (τ+1,τ,m2τ+62,τ+1,τ)
    hmτ+1 (τ+1,τ+2,m2τ+62,τ1,τ)
    m+22 cm2 (m2,m22,0,m+42,m+22)
    fm22 (m2,m22,2,m2,m+22)
    fm+22 (m2,m+22,2,m2,m22)
    gm2 (m+42,m+22,2,m2,m22)
    hm2 (m+42,m+22,2,m2,m+22)
    m+42 fm2 (m+22,m2,1,m+22,m2)

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Now, consider Table 4, where the vector of f0Sτ(f0) has its first metric coordinate equal to 1. We may also check that no two vertices a1,a2Sτ(f0) exist such as r(a1,DJm)r(a2,DJm)=0I, where I is the unit vector and τ{1,2,,m+42}. Furthermore, no two vertices a1Sτ(f0) and a2Sυ(f0) exist such as r(a1,DJm)r(a2,DJm)=τυ, for some τ,υ{1,2,,m+42} and τυ. Finally, the set DJm={c0,c1,cm2,g0,gm1} is the MDRS. As a result, Lemma 2.3 holds true.

    Lemma 2.4. ψ(Jm)=4, odd integers m6.

    Proof. To demonstrate that ψ(Jm)=4, where m6 is an odd integer, it is enough to find a DRS of order 4. Now, by using the sets Sτ(f0) from Table 1, the metric coordinate vectors are demonstrated in Table 5 for each vertex of Jm with respect to the set DJm={c0,cm32,fm12,g0}.

    Table 5.  Metric coordinate vectors for Jm if m6 is odd.
    τ Sτ(f0) DJm={c0,cm32,fm12,g0}
    0 f0 (1,m12,m+32,1)
    1 c0 (0,m32,m+12,2)
    g0 (2,m+12,m+12,0)
    h0 (2,m+12,m+12,2)
    2 c1 (1,m52,m12,3)
    cm1 (1,m12,m+12,3)
    g1 (3,m12,m12,1)
    gm1 (3,m+32,m+12,3)
    h1 (3,m12,m12,3)
    hm1 (3,m+32,m+12,1)
    3τm12 cτ1 (τ1,m2τ12,m2τ+32,τ+1)
    cmτ+1 (τ1,m2τ+52,m2τ+52,τ+1)
    fτ2 (τ1,m2τ+32,m2τ+72,τ1)
    fmτ+2 ={(2,m+12,m+32,2), if τ=3;(τ1,m2τ+92,m2τ+92,τ1), if τ>3.
    gτ1 (τ+1,m2τ+32,m2τ+32,τ1)
    gmτ+1 (τ+1,m2τ+92,m2τ+52,τ+1)
    hτ1 (τ+1,m2τ+32,m2τ+32,τ+1)
    hmτ+1 (τ+1,m2τ+92,m2τ+52,τ1)
    m+12 cm12 (m12,1,1,m+32)
    cm+12 (m12,2,2,m+32)
    fm32 (m12,1,3,m12)
    fm+32 (m12,4,4,m12)
    gm12 (m+32,3,1,m12)
    gm+12 (m+32,4,2,m+12)
    hm12 (m+32,3,1,m+12)
    hm+12 (m+32,4,2,m12)
    m+32 fm12 (m+12,2,0,m+12)
    fm+12 (m+12,3,3,m+12)

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Now, consider Table 5, where the vector of f0Sτ(f0) has its first metric coordinate equal to 1. We may also check that no two vertices a1,a2Sτ(f0) exist such as r(a1,DJm)r(a2,DJm)=0I, where I is the unit vector and τ{1,2,,m+32}. Furthermore, no two vertices a1Sτ(f0) and a2Sυ(f0) exist such as r(a1,DJm)r(a2,DJm)=τυ, for some τ,υ{1,2,,m+32} and τυ. Finally, the set DJm={c0,cm32,fm12,g0} is the MDRS. As a result, Lemma 2.4 holds true.

    The combination of Lemmas 2.3 and 2.4 yields the following main theorem:

    Theorem 2.5. Let Jm be the flower snark, then for m6,

    ψ(Jm)={4,if m is odd ;5,if m is even .

    In this section, we will concentrate on determining the DMD of quasi-flower snarks Gm.

    Figure 2 demonstrates the network of quasi-flower snark Gm, which has 4m vertices and 6m edges. The vertex set for the quasi-flower snarks is VGm = {cτ,fτ,gτ,hτ: 0τm1}, and the edge set is EGm = {cτcτ+1,cτfτ,fτgτ,fτhτ,gτgτ+1,hτhτ+1: 0τm2} {cm1c0,cm1fm1,fm1gm1,fm1hm1,gm1g0,hm1h0}.

    Figure 2.  Quasi-flower snark G9.

    As shown in Figure 2, the inner cycle vertices are labeled as {cτ : 0τm1}, the set of central vertices are labeled as {fτ : 0τm1}, and the outer cycle vertices are labeled as {gτ : 0τm1} {hτ : 0τm1}.

    MDRSs for Gm are to be found in this section. It follows from Theorem 1.4 that

    ψ(Gm){3,if m is odd;4,  otherwise,

    for all m6. We shall also show that ψ(Gm)=4, for all m6.

    Define the vertex subset Sτ(f0)={gVGm:d(f0,g)=τ}VGm having distance τ from f0. The Table 6 is a simple formulation for Sτ(f0) and will be used to compute the distances between each pair of vertices in VGm.

    Table 6.  Sτ(f0) for Gm.
    m τ Sτ(f0)
    1 {c0, g0, h0}
    2 {c1, cm1, g1, gm1, h1, hm1}
    3τm2 {cτ1, cmτ+1, fτ2, fmτ+2, gτ1, gmτ+1, hτ1, hmτ+1}
    even m+22 {cm2, fm22, fm+22, gm2, hm2}
    m+42 {fm2}
    odd m+12 {cm12, cm+12, fm32, fm+32, gm12, gm+12, hm12, hm+12}
    m+32 {fm12, fm+12}

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    The following facts can be demonstrated as a result of the symmetry of Gm, where m6:

    d(fτ,gυ)=d(fτ,hυ)=d(f0,g|τυ|) if 0|τυ|m1;

    d(cτ,cυ)=d(f0,c|τυ|)1 if 0|τυ|m1;

    d(cτ,fυ)=d(f0,c|τυ|) if 0|τυ|m1;

    d(cτ,gυ)=d(cτ,hυ)=d(f0,c|τυ|)+1 if 0|τυ|m1;

    d(gτ,hυ)=d(f0,c|τυ|)+1 if 0|τυ|m1;

    d(fτ,fυ)=d(f0,f|τυ|) if 0|τυ|m1;

    d(gτ,gυ)=d(hτ,hυ)=d(f0,g|τυ|)1 if 0|τυ|m1.

    Therefore, we can recalculate the distances between each pair of vertices in VGm if d(f0,g) is known for each gVGm.

    Lemma 3.1. For any positive integer m6, ψ(Gm)>3.

    Proof. To prove the DMD ψ(Gm)>3, we must show that every subset DGmVGm of cardinality 3 is not a DRS for Gm. Table 7 demonstrates the non-doubly resolved pairs of vertices from the set VGm as well as all possible forms of subset DGm. Let us compute that any two vertices of the set {cτ,cυ,f0;0τ<υm1} do not doubly resolve the vertices f0,g0. For example, it is clear that d(f0,f0)=0,d(f0,g0)=1. Now, for 0τm2,1υm2, we have

    Table 7.  Non-doubly resolving pairs of vertices for Gm, where m6.
    DGm Non-doubly resolved pairs
    {cτ,cυ,f0}, 0τ<υm1 {f0,g0}
    {cτ,f0,gυ}, 0τ,υm1 {f0,h0}
    {cτ,f0,fυ}, 0τm1, 1υm1 {g0,h0}
    {cτ,f0,hυ}, 0τ,υm1 {f0,g0}
    {f0,fτ,gυ}, 1τm1, 0υm1 {c0,h0}
    {f0,fτ,fυ}, 1τ<υm1 {c0,g0}
    {f0,gτ,hυ}, 0τ,υm1 {c0,f0}
    {f0,fτ,hυ}, 1τm1, 0υm1 {c0,g0}
    {f0,hτ,hυ}, 0τ<υm1 {f0,g0}
    {f0,gτ,gυ}, 0τ<υm1 ={{c0,h0}, if m is even {c0,f0}, if m is odd 

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    d(cτ,f0)=d(f0,cτ)=τ+1;

    d(cτ,g0)=d(f0,cτ)+1=τ+2;

    d(cυ,f0)=d(f0,cυ)=υ+1;

    d(cυ,g0)=d(f0,cυ)+1=υ+2.

    Also, for m+22τm2,m+22υm1, we have

    d(cτ,f0)=d(f0,cτ)=mτ+1;

    d(cτ,g0)=d(f0,cτ)+1=mτ+2;

    d(cυ,f0)=d(f0,cυ)=mυ+1;

    d(cυ,g0)=d(f0,cυ)+1=mυ+2.

    So, d(cτ,f0)d(cτ,g0)=d(cυ,f0)d(cυ,g0)=d(f0,f0)d(f0,g0)=1, that is, the set {cτ,cυ,f0;0τ<υm1} is not a DRS of Gm. Accordingly, we can investigate all the possible types of subset DGm shown in Table 7 and verify their associated non-doubly resolved pairs of vertices.

    Lemma 3.2. ψ(Gm)=4, even integers m6.

    Proof. To demonstrate that ψ(Gm)=4, where m6 is an even integer, it is enough to find a DRS of order 4. Now, by using the sets Sτ(f0) from Table 6, the metric coordinate vectors are demonstrated in Table 8 for every vertex of Gm with respect to the set DGm={c0,cm2,f1,gm+22}.

    Table 8.  Metric coordinate vectors for Gm if m6 is even.
    τ Sτ(f0) DGm={c0,cm2,f1,gm+22}
    0 f0 (1,m+22,3,m2)
    1 c0 (0,m2,2,m+22)
    g0 (2,m+42,2,m22)
    h0 (2,m+42,2,m+22)
    2 c1 (1,m22,1,m+42)
    cm1 (1,m22,3,m2)
    g1 (3,m+22,1,m2)
    gm1 (3,m+22,3,m42)
    h1 (3,m+22,1,m+42)
    hm1 (3,m+22,3,m2)
    3τm2 cτ1 (τ1,m2τ+22,τ1,m2τ+82)
    cmτ+1 (τ1,m2τ+22,τ+1,m2τ+42)
    fτ2 ={(2,m2,0,m+22), if τ=3;(τ1,m2τ+62,τ1,m2τ+82), if τ>3.
    fmτ+2 (τ1,m2τ+62,τ+1,m2τ+42)
    gτ1 (τ+1,m2τ+62,τ1,m2τ+42)
    gmτ+1 (τ+1,m2τ+62,τ+1,m2τ2)
    hτ1 (τ+1,m2τ+62,τ1,m2τ+82)
    hmτ+1 (τ+1,m2τ+62,τ+1,m2τ+42)
    m+22 cm2 (m2,0,m2,3)
    fm22 (m2,2,m2,3)
    fm+22 (m2,2,m+42,1)
    gm2 (m+42,2,m2,1)
    hm2 (m+42,2,m2,3)
    m+42 fm2 (m+22,1,m+22,2)

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Now, consider Table 8, where the vector of f0Sτ(f0) has its first metric coordinate equal to 1. We may also check that no two vertices b1,b2Sτ(f0) exist such as r(b1,DGm)r(b2,DGm)=0I, where I is the unit vector and τ{1,2,,m+42}. Furthermore, no two vertices b1Sτ(f0) and b2Sυ(f0) exist such as r(b1,DGm)r(b2,DGm)=τυ, for some τ,υ{1,2,,m+42} and τυ. Finally, the set DGm={c0,cm2,f1,gm+22} is the MDRS. As a result, Lemma 3.2 holds true.

    Lemma 3.3. ψ(Gm)=4, odd integers m6.

    Proof. To demonstrate that ψ(Gm)=4, where m6 is an odd integer, it is enough to find a DRS of order 4. Now, by using the sets Sτ(f0) from Table 6, the metric coordinate vectors are demonstrated in Table 9 for every vertex of Gm with respect to the set DGm={c0,cm32,fm12,g0}.

    Table 9.  Metric coordinate vectors for Gm if m6 is odd.
    τ Sτ(f0) DGm={c0,cm32,fm12,g0}
    0 f0 (1,m12,m+32,1)
    1 c0 (0,m32,m+12,2)
    g0 (2,m+12,m+12,0)
    h0 (2,m+12,m+12,2)
    2 c1 (1,m52,m12,3)
    cm1 (1,m12,m+12,3)
    g1 (3,m12,m12,1)
    gm1 (3,m+32,m+12,1)
    h1 (3,m12,m12,3)
    hm1 (3,m+32,m+12,3)
    3τm12 cτ1 (τ1,m2τ12,m2τ+32,τ+1)
    cmτ+1 (τ1,m2τ+52,m2τ+52,τ+1)
    fτ2 (τ1,m2τ+32,m2τ+72,τ1)
    fmτ+2 ={(2,m+12,m+32,2), if τ=3;(τ1,m2τ+92,m2τ+92,τ1), if τ>3.
    gτ1 (τ+1,m2τ+32,m2τ+32,τ1)
    gmτ+1 (τ+1,m2τ+92,m2τ+52,τ1)
    hτ1 (τ+1,m2τ+32,m2τ+32,τ+1)
    hmτ+1 (τ+1,m2τ+92,m2τ+52,τ+1)
    m+12 cm12 (m12,1,1,m+32)
    cm+12 (m12,2,2,m+32)
    fm32 (m12,1,3,m12)
    fm+32 (m12,4,4,m12)
    gm12 (m+32,3,1,m12)
    gm+12 (m+32,4,2,m12)
    hm12 (m+32,3,1,m+32)
    hm+12 (m+32,4,2,m+32)
    m+32 fm12 (m+12,2,0,m+12)
    fm+12 (m+12,3,3,m+12)

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Now, consider Table 9, where the vector of f0Sτ(f0) has its first metric coordinate equal to 1. We may also check that no two vertices b1,b2Sτ(f0) exist such as r(b1,DGm)r(b2,DGm)=0I, where I denotes the unit vector and τ{1,2,,m+32}. Furthermore, no two vertices b1Sτ(f0) and b2Sυ(f0) exist such as r(b1,DGm)r(b2,DGm)=τυ, for some τ,υ{1,2,,m+32} and τυ. Finally, the set DGm={c0,cm32,fm12,g0} is the MDRS. As a result, Lemma 3.3 holds true.

    The combination of Lemmas 3.2 and 3.3 yields the following main theorem:

    Theorem 3.4. Let Gm be the quasi-flower snark for m6. Then, ψ(Gm)=4.

    DRSs have recently been employed to find the origin of epidemics in several complex networks, including social networks, human epidemics, the cause of a disease outbreak, etc. (see [51,52]). To get the best possible detection of an epidemic source, we specifically take into account a network that uses DRSs to lower the number of observers.

    Assume a social network set up as a flower snark network J5, where the node set VJ5 = {cτ,fτ,gτ,hτ: 0τ4} stands in for the individuals and the edge set EJ5 = {cτcτ+1,cτfτ,fτgτ,fτhτ,gτgτ+1,hτhτ+1,g0hn1,gn1h0: 0τ4} between the nodes stands in for the connections between the individuals. An immediate solution can be found when observers are placed throughout the network, and the inter-node distances are reliable and well-known. However, the entire process would be very costly and time-consuming.

    Then, what number of observers is necessary to account for epidemic sources with an unknown starting time and node-to-node transmission delays? Each node has a unique representation depending upon the minimum distance from the observer nodes. We employed the MDRS DJ5={c0,c1,f2,g0} of the flower snark network J5 to reduce the number of observers.

    We only placed the observers on the nodes c0,c1,f2,g0 by applying Lemma 2.4 and Theorem 2.5. It is clear from Table 5 and Figure 3 that each node has a unique representation and the epidemic propagation will be optimal by placing observers at the nodes c0,c1,f2,g0. This hypothetical situation clarifies how MDRSs can be used to solve source localization issues.

    Figure 3.  Source detection in social network.

    Moreover, the DRSs are valuable for identifying faults in communication networks, assisting administrators in promptly locating and repairing issues for reliable operations. Additionally, they are beneficial in cybersecurity to detect and localize cyberattacks, allowing for quick responses to breaches. In environmental monitoring, DRSs aid in identifying sources of pollution, facilitating swift actions to address environmental hazards. The findings of this study provide a fundamental understanding of DRSs and their potential to enhance source detection in various real-world scenarios.

    In this article, the DMD for the flower snarks Jm and quasi-flower snarks Gm is computed by describing their MDRSs. We conclude that the DMD for the flower snarks Jm is finite and depends upon the order of the network. Also, the DMD for the quasi-flower snarks Gm is finite and free from the order of the network. An algorithm is created to calculate the MDRSs and DMD of a network with the help of Matlab or any other simulation tool. Further, an application of the work done in the context of source localization is also provided. It is also clearly observed that computing MDRSs for a network is an NP-hard problem (see [35]), which explains the limitations of computing this parameter and the importance of the obtained results. Exploring future directions for DRSs in various families of networks can help in the development of combinatorial designs, error-correcting codes, network analysis, and optimization problems, among other fields. Following are a few points that address the limitations of the study:

    ● Constructing DRSs with desirable properties can be a challenging task.

    ● The problem of finding MDRSs is known to be NP-hard, which means that there is no known efficient algorithm to solve it for all cases.

    ● As a result, finding optimal DRSs can require significant computational effort.

    In conclusion, DRSs have limitations in terms of size, optimality, ambiguity, construction difficulty, practical implementation, and generalization to various problem domains. These restrictions emphasize the importance of carefully taking into account the particular problem requirements and limits and illustrate the difficulties and complexities involved with using DRSs in different scenarios.

    Open Problem 5.1. Investigate the DRSs for the power paths Prn for all integers r, and n, where r<n2.

    Muhammad Ahmad was an engaged participant in initiating the problem, and ensuring the validation of results. Muhammad Faheem contributed to the methodology and conducting the final review. Sanaa A. Bajri played a crucial role in analyzing and computing the results, as well as initiating the drafting process of the study. Zohaib Zahid played a pivotal role in problem discussion, gathering essential data, and providing continuous supervision. Muhammad Javaid participated in characterizing and calculating the results and assisted with software in drafting the study. Hamiden Abd El-Wahed Khalifa contributed to the discussing the problem, and meticulously proofread the final version. All authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript for publication.

    The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.

    This research is funded by Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University Researchers Supporting Project number (PNURSP2024R527), Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

    The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.


    Acknowledgments



    College Students' Innovation and Entrepreneurship Training Program.
    The study is funded by Binzhou Medical University Research Fund Project (Grant Number BY2021KYQD02) and by College Students' Innovation and Entrepreneurship Training Program (Grant Number 202410440089).

    Conflict of interest



    The authors declare no conflict of interest.

    Author contributions



    Yue Xu: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Investigation, Formal Analysis, Writing - Original Draft, Wrriting - Review& Editing;
    Fulei Zhang: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Resources, Investigation, Wrriting - Review& Editing;
    Kairui Zhu: Visualization, Formal Analysis, Software, Investigation, Wrriting - Review& Editing;
    Ying Liu: Investigation, Visualization, Supervision, Wrriting - Review& Editing;
    Xuejuan Wang: Investigation, Validation, Resources, Wrriting - Review& Editing;
    Yunqi Ma :Conceptualization, Funding Acquisition, Resources, Supervision, Writing - Original Draft, Wrriting - Review& Editing.

    [1] Banday AZ, Mondal S, Barman P, et al. (2021) What lies ahead for young hearts in the 21st century–is it double trouble of acute rheumatic fever and kawasaki disease in developing countries?. Front Cardiovasc Med 8: 694393. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2021.694393
    [2] Antoñanzas F, Goossens H (2019) The economics of antibiotic resistance: a claim for personalised treatments. Eur J Health Econ 20: 483-485. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-018-1021-z
    [3] Cella E, Giovanetti M, Benedetti F, et al. (2023) Joining forces against antibiotic resistance: The one health solution. Pathogens 12: 1074. https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens12091074
    [4] Rahman MRT, Fliss I, Biron E (2022) Insights in the development and uses of alternatives to antibiotic growth promoters in poultry and swine production. Antibiotics 11: 766. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11060766
    [5] von Tigerstrom B, Wilson K (2020) COVID-19 travel restrictions and the international health regulations (2005). BMJ global health 5: e002629. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-002629
    [6] Shi Q, Ye Y, Lan P, et al. (2021) Prevalence and characteristics of ceftriaxone-resistant Salmonella in children's hospital in Hangzhou, China. Front Microbiol 12: 764787. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.764787
    [7] Lade H, Kim JS (2021) Bacterial targets of antibiotics in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Antibiotics 10: 398. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics10040398
    [8] Shi X, Xia Y, Wei W, et al. (2022) Accelerated spread of antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) induced by non-antibiotic conditions: roles and mechanisms. Water Res 224: 119060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2022.119060
    [9] Oechslin F (2018) Resistance development to bacteriophages occurring during bacteriophage therapy. Viruses 10: 351. https://doi.org/10.3390/v10070351
    [10] Zhang L, Gallo RL (2016) Antimicrobial peptides. Curr Biol 26: R14-R19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2015.11.017
    [11] Sully EK, Geller BL (2016) Antisense antimicrobial therapeutics. Curr Opin Microbiol 33: 47-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mib.2016.05.017
    [12] Elbediwi M, Rolff J (2024) Metabolic pathways and antimicrobial peptide resistance in bacteria. J Antimicrob Chemoth 79: 1473-1483. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkae128
    [13] Shen F, Fang Y, Wu Y, et al. (2023) Metal ions and nanometallic materials in antitumor immunity: function, application, and perspective. J Nanobiotechnol 21: 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12951-023-01771-z
    [14] Richter A, Sutherland D, Ebrahimikondori H, et al. (2022) Associating biological activity and predicted structure of antimicrobial peptides from amphibians and insects. Antibiotics 11: 1710. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11121710
    [15] Huynh L, Velásquez J, Rabara R, et al. (2021) Rational design of antimicrobial peptides targeting Gram-negative bacteria. Comput Biol Chem 92: 107475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiolchem.2021.107475
    [16] Pane K, Sgambati V, Zanfardino A, et al. (2016) A new cryptic cationic antimicrobial peptide from human apolipoprotein E with antibacterial activity and immunomodulatory effects on human cells. FEBS J 283: 2115-2131. https://doi.org/10.1111/febs.13725
    [17] Udaondo Z, Matilla MA (2020) Mining for novel antibiotics in the age of antimicrobial resistance. Microb Biotechnol 13: 1702-1704. https://doi.org/10.1111/1751-7915.13662
    [18] Pedron CN, Torres MDT, Oliveira CS, et al. (2023) Molecular hybridization strategy for tuning bioactive peptide function. Commun Biol 6: 1067. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-023-05254-7
    [19] Eleftherianos I, Zhang W, Heryanto C, et al. (2021) Diversity of insect antimicrobial peptides and proteins-A functional perspective: a review. Int J Biol Macromol 191: 277-287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2021.09.082
    [20] Dho M, Candian V, Tedeschi R (2023) Insect antimicrobial peptides: advancements, enhancements and new challenges. Antibiotics 12: 952. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12060952
    [21] Agakidou E, Agakidis C, Kontou A, et al. (2022) Antimicrobial peptides in early-life host defense, perinatal infections, and necrotizing enterocolitis—an update. J Clin Med 11: 5074. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11175074
    [22] Baumann T, Nickling JH, Bartholomae M, et al. (2017) Prospects of in vivo incorporation of non-canonical amino acids for the chemical diversification of antimicrobial peptides. Front microbiol 8: 124. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2017.00124
    [23] Satchanska G, Davidova S, Gergova A (2024) Diversity and mechanisms of action of plant, animal, and human antimicrobial peptides. Antibiotics 13: 202. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics13030202
    [24] Gagandeep KR, Narasingappa RB, Vyas GV (2024) Unveiling mechanisms of antimicrobial peptide: actions beyond the membranes disruption. Heliyon 10: e38079. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e38079
    [25] Nizi MG, Persoons L, Corona A, et al. (2022) Discovery of 2-phenylquinolines with broad-spectrum anti-coronavirus activity. ACS Med Chem Lett 13: 855-864. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsmedchemlett.2c00123
    [26] Richter A, Sutherland D, Ebrahimikondori H, et al. (2022) Associating biological activity and predicted structure of antimicrobial peptides from amphibians and insects. Antibiotics 11: 1710. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11121710
    [27] Blanco P, Hjort K, Martínez JL, et al. (2020) Antimicrobial peptide exposure selects for resistant and fit Stenotrophomonas maltophilia mutants that show cross-resistance to antibiotics. mSphere 5: e00717-20. https://doi.org/10.1128/mSphere.00717-20
    [28] Hollmann A, Martinez M, Maturana P, et al. (2018) Antimicrobial peptides: interaction with model and biological membranes and synergism with chemical antibiotics. Front Chem 6: 204. https://doi.org/10.3389/fchem.2018.00204
    [29] Li D, Wang Y, Chen C, et al. (2022) Advances in several important antimicrobial lipopeptids from Bacillus spp. Chin J Biotechnol 38: 1768-1783. https://doi.org/10.13345/j.cjb.220001
    [30] NIU JB, XUE LG, WU JL, et al. (2020) Multicopy integrative expression and optimization of cecropin AD expression in Pichia pastoris. Microbiol Chin 47: 1441-1451.
    [31] GUAN L, CUI Q, LI S, et al. (2018) Research advances on the structure, function and regulation of defensins gene family in plants. Biotechnol Bull 34: 33-39.
    [32] Kościuczuk EM, Lisowski P, Jarczak J, et al. (2012) Cathelicidins: family of antimicrobial peptides. a review. Mol Biol Rep 12: 10957-10970. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11033-012-1997-x
    [33] Michels K, Nemeth E, Ganz T, et al. (2015) Hepcidin and host defense against infectious diseases. PLoS Pathog 11: e1004998. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1004998
    [34] Arsenovic PT, Ramachandran I, Bathula K, et al. (2016) Nesprin-2G, a component of the nuclear LINC complex, is subject to myosin-dependent tension. Biophys J 110: 34-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpj.2015.11.014
    [35] Sun B, Wibowo D, Middelberg APJ, et al. (2018) Cost-effective downstream processing of recombinantly produced pexiganan peptide and its antimicrobial activity. AMB Express 8: 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13568-018-0541-3
    [36] Da Silva BR, Conrado AJS, Pereira AL, et al. (2017) Antibacterial activity of a novel antimicrobial peptide [W7] KR12-KAEK derived from KR-12 against Streptococcus mutans planktonic cells and biofilms. Biofouling 33: 835-846. https://doi.org/10.1080/08927014.2017.1374378
    [37] Xu D, Lu W (2020) Defensins: a double-edged sword in host immunity. Front Immunol 11: 764. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.00764
    [38] Park AR, Kim SW, Kim SY, et al. (2021) Expression of antimicrobial peptide (AMP), cecropin B, in a fused form to SUMO tag with or without three-glycine linker in Escherichia coli and evaluation of bacteriolytic activity of the purified AMP. Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins 13: 1780-1789. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-021-09797-1
    [39] Chu HL, Chih YH, Peng KL, et al. (2020) Antimicrobial peptides with enhanced salt resistance and antiendotoxin properties. Int J Mol Sci 21: 6810. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21186810
    [40] Chang WF, Chen SH, Chen YF (2018) Correlation of an antimicrobial peptide's potency and its influences on membrane elasticity. Phys Rev E 98: 042408. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.98.042408
    [41] Savini F, Loffredo MR, Troiano C, et al. (2020) Binding of an antimicrobial peptide to bacterial cells: interaction with different species, strains and cellular components. BBA-Biomembranes 1862: 183291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbamem.2020.183291
    [42] Hazam PK, Cheng CC, Hsieh CY, et al. (2022) Development of bactericidal peptides against multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii with enhanced stability and low toxicity. Int J Mol Sci 23: 2191. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23042191
    [43] Yehudi Y, Hughes-Noehrer L, Goble C, et al. (2023) Subjective data models in bioinformatics and how wet lab and computational biologists conceptualise data. Sci Data 10: 756. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-023-02627-9
    [44] Bournez C, Riool M, de Boer L, et al. (2023) CalcAMP: a new machine learning model for the accurate prediction of antimicrobial activity of peptides. Antibiotics 12: 725. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12040725
    [45] Petkov P, Lilkova E, Ilieva N, et al. (2019) Self-association of antimicrobial peptides: a molecular dynamics simulation study on bombinin. Int J Mol Sci 20: 5450. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20215450
    [46] Heddle JG, Chakraborti S, Iwasaki K (2017) Natural and artificial protein cages: design, structure and therapeutic applications. Curr Opin Struct Biol 43: 148-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbi.2017.03.007
    [47] Denny PW (2018) Microbial protein targets: towards understanding and intervention. Parasitology 145: 111-115. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0031182017002037
    [48] Malini RI, Zabara M, Gontsarik M, et al. (2020) Self-assembly of glycerol monooleate with the antimicrobial peptide LL-37: a molecular dynamics study. RSC Adv 14: 8291-8302. https://doi.org/10.1039/c9ra10037g
    [49] Betush RJ, Urban JM, Nilsson BL (2018) Balancing hydrophobicity and sequence pattern to influence self-assembly of amphipathic peptides. Peptide Sci 110: e23099. https://doi.org/10.1002/bip.23099
    [50] Rawson KM, Lacey MM, Strong PN, et al. (2022) Improving the therapeutic index of Smp24, a venom-derived antimicrobial peptide: increased activity against gram-negative bacteria. Int J Mol Sci 23: 7979. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23147979
    [51] Seiferth D, Biggin PC, Tucker SJ (2022) When is a hydrophobic gate not a hydrophobic gate?. J Gen Physiol 154: e202213210. https://doi.org/10.1085/jgp.202213210
    [52] Desjardins M, Lefebvre B, Lavallée C, et al. (2020) Gradient diffusion susceptibility testing for Neisseria gonorrhoeae: an accurate alternative to agar dilution in high-MIC strains?. Access Microbiol 2: acmi000116. https://doi.org/10.1099/acmi.0.000116
    [53] Portal E, Sands K, Portnojs A, et al. (2021) Legionella antimicrobial sensitivity testing: comparison of microbroth dilution with BCYE and LASARUS solid media. J Antimicrob Chemoth 76: 1197-1204. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkaa535
    [54] Kašpar M, Bajer T, Bajerová P, et al. (2022) Comparison of phenolic profile of balsamic vinegars determined using liquid and gas chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry. Molecules 27: 1356. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27041356
    [55] MassBank Database Committee, The Mass Spectrometry Society of Japan.Proposal: Recommendation on measuring and providing mass spectra as chemical information of organic molecules (secondary publication). J-STAGE (2019) 8: A0076. https://doi.org/10.5702/massspectrometry.A0076
    [56] Miele D, Xia X, Catenacci L, et al. (2021) Chitosan oleate coated PLGA nanoparticles as siRNA drug delivery system. Pharmaceutics 13: 1716. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics13101716
    [57] Bailey BA, Desai KGH, Ochyl LJ, et al. (2017) Self-encapsulating poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid)(PLGA) microspheres for intranasal vaccine delivery. Mol Pharmaceutics 14: 3228-3237. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.7b00586
    [58] Mares-Bou S, Serrano MA, Gómez-Tejedor JA (2023) Core–shell polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) base electrospinning microfibers for drug delivery. Polymers 15: 1554. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym15061554
    [59] Thi MTT, Wibowo D, Rehm BHA (2020) Pseudomonas aeruginosa Biofilms. Int J Mol Sci 21: 8671. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21228671
    [60] Vurro F, Jabalera Y, Mannucci S, et al. (2021) Improving the cellular uptake of biomimetic magnetic nanoparticles. Nanomaterials 11: 766. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano11030766
    [61] Liu P, Zhou Y, Shi X, et al. (2021) A cyclic nano-reactor achieving enhanced photodynamic tumor therapy by reversing multiple resistances. J Nanobiotechnol 19: 149. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12951-021-00893-6
    [62] Chen B, Zhang Z, Zhang Q, et al. (2023) Antimicrobial peptides in the global microbiome: biosynthetic genes and resistance determinants. Environ Sci Technol 57: 7698-7708. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.3c01664
    [63] Teixeira MC, Carbone C, Sousa MC, et al. (2020) Nanomedicines for the delivery of antimicrobial peptides (AMPs). Nanomaterials 10: 560. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano10030560
    [64] Zharkova MS, Orlov DS, Golubeva OY, et al. (2019) Application of antimicrobial peptides of the innate immune system in combination with conventional antibiotics—a novel way to combat antibiotic resistance?. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 9: 128. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2019.00128
    [65] van Gent ME, Ali M, Nibbering PH, et al. (2021) Current advances in lipid and polymeric antimicrobial peptide delivery systems and coatings for the prevention and treatment of bacterial infections. Pharmaceutics 13: 1840. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics13111840
    [66] Wang Q, Zhang D, Dai Y R, et al. (2024) Efficient tobacco rattle virus-induced gene editing in tomato mediated by the CRISPR/Cas9 system. Biotechnol J 19: 2400204. https://doi.org/10.1002/biot.202400204
    [67] Biswaro LS, da Costa Sousa MG, Rezende TMB, et al. (2018) Antimicrobial peptides and nanotechnology, recent advances and challenges. Front Microbiol 9: 855. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.00855
    [68] Martin-Serrano Á, Gómez R, Ortega P, et al. (2019) Nanosystems as vehicles for the delivery of antimicrobial peptides (AMPs). Pharmaceutics 11: 448. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics11090448
    [69] Imperlini E, Massaro F, Buonocore F (2023) Antimicrobial peptides against bacterial pathogens: Innovative delivery nanosystems for pharmaceutical applications. Antibiotics 12: 184. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12010184
    [70] Makowski M, Silva ÍC, Pais do Amaral C, et al. (2019) Advances in lipid and metal nanoparticles for antimicrobial peptide delivery. Pharmaceutics 11: 588. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics11110588
    [71] Tang Z, Ma Q, Chen X, et al. (2021) Recent advances and challenges in nanodelivery systems for antimicrobial peptides (AMPs). Antibiotics 10: 990. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics10080990
    [72] Fadaka AO, Sibuyi NRS, Madiehe AM, et al. (2021) Nanotechnology-based delivery systems for antimicrobial peptides. Pharmaceutics 13: 1795. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics13111795
    [73] Deshayes C, Arafath MN, Apaire-Marchais V, et al. (2022) Drug delivery systems for the oral administration of antimicrobial peptides: Promising tools to treat infectious diseases. Front Med Technol 3: 778645. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmedt.2021.778645
    [74] Mali P, Sherje AP (2022) Cellulose nanocrystals: fundamentals and biomedical applications. Carbohyd Polym 275: 118668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2021.118668
    [75] Filho D, Guerrero M, Pariguana M, et al. (2023) Hydrogel-based microneedle as a drug delivery system. Pharmaceutics 15: 2444. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics15102444
    [76] Ron-Doitch S, Sawodny B, Kühbacher A, et al. (2016) Reduced cytotoxicity and enhanced bioactivity of cationic antimicrobial peptides liposomes in cell cultures and 3D epidermis model against HSV. J Control Release 229: 163-171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2016.03.025
    [77] Barzan G, Kokalari I, Gariglio G, et al. (2022) Molecular aspects of the interaction with gram-negative and gram-positive bacteria of hydrothermal carbon nanoparticles associated with Bac8c2, 5Leu antimicrobial peptide. ACS omega 7: 16402-16413. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.2c00305
    [78] van der Weide H, Cossío U, Gracia R, et al. (2020) Therapeutic efficacy of novel antimicrobial peptide AA139-nanomedicines in a multidrug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae pneumonia-septicemia model in rats. Antimicrob Agents Ch 64: e00517-20. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00517-20
    [79] Kim B, Yang Q, Chan LW, et al. (2021) Fusogenic porous silicon nanoparticles as a broad-spectrum immunotherapy against bacterial infections. Nanoscale Horiz 6: 330-340. https://doi.org/10.1039/d0nh00624f
    [80] Vargas A, Garcia G, Rivara K, et al. (2023) A designed host defense peptide for the topical treatment of MRSA-infected diabetic wounds. Int J Mol Sci 24: 2143. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24032143
    [81] Shakhakarmi K, Seo JE, Lamichhane S, et al. (2023) EGF, a veteran of wound healing: highlights on its mode of action, clinical applications with focus on wound treatment, and recent drug delivery strategies. Arch Pharm Res 46: 299-322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12272-023-01444-3
    [82] Anklesaria P, Russell ND (2023) Iterative hypothesis testing in HIV vaccine research: moving towards success. J Int AIDS Soc 26: e26102. https://doi.org/10.1002/jia2.26102
    [83] Lu B, Lim JM, Yu B, et al. (2024) The next-generation DNA vaccine platforms and delivery systems: advances, challenges and prospects. Front Immunol 15: 1332939. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2024.1332939
    [84] Lewies A, Du Plessis LH, Wentzel JF (2019) Antimicrobial peptides: the Achilles' heel of antibiotic resistance?. Probiotics Antimicro 11: 370-381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-018-9465-0
    [85] Mahlapuu M, Björn C, Ekblom J (2020) Antimicrobial peptides as therapeutic agents: opportunities and challenges. Crit Rev Biotechnol 40: 978-992. https://doi.org/10.1080/07388551.2020.1796576
    [86] Puan SL, Erriah P, Baharudin MMA, et al. (2023) Antimicrobial peptides from Bacillus spp. and strategies to enhance their yield. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 107: 5569-5593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-023-12651-9
    [87] Primo LMDG, Roque-Borda CA, Canales CSC, et al. (2024) Antimicrobial peptides grafted onto the surface of N-acetylcysteine-chitosan nanoparticles can revitalize drugs against clinical isolates of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Carbohyd Polym 323: 121449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2023.121449
    [88] Pipiya SO, Terekhov SS, Mokrushina YA, et al. (2020) Engineering artificial biodiversity of lantibiotics to expand chemical space of DNA-encoded antibiotics. Biochemistry 85: 1319-1334. https://doi.org/10.1134/S0006297920110048
    [89] Bellio P, Luzi C, Mancini A, et al. (2018) Cerium oxide nanoparticles as potential antibiotic adjuvant. Effects of CeO2 nanoparticles on bacterial outer membrane permeability. BBA Biomembranes 1860: 2428-2435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbamem.2018.07.002
    [90] Salta J, Benhamou RI, Herzog IM, et al. (2017) Tuning the effects of bacterial membrane permeability through photo-isomerization of antimicrobial cationic amphiphiles. Chemistry (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) 23: 12724-12728. https://doi.org/10.1002/chem.201703010
    [91] dos Santos Machado L, Vilas Boas de Carvalho E, de Affonseca e Silva FV, et al. (2017) Elucidating unusual modes of action and resistance of antibacterial peptides. Current Top Med Chemistry 17: 520-536. https://doi.org/10.2174/1568026616666160713123203
    [92] Mathur H, Field D, Rea MC, et al. (2017) Bacteriocin-antimicrobial synergy: a medical and food perspective. Front Microbiol 8: 1205. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2017.01205
    [93] Casida JE, Durkin KA (2017) Pesticide chemical research in toxicology: lessons from nature. Chem Res Toxicol 30: 94-104. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00303
    [94] Li J, Feng S, Liu X, et al. (2022) Effects of traditional Chinese medicine and its active ingredients on drug-resistant bacteria. Front Pharmacol 13: 837907. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2022.837907
    [95] Tam CCF, Cheung KS, Lam S, et al. (2020) Impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak on ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction care in Hong Kong, China. Circ-Cardiovasc Qual 13: e006631. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.120.006631
    [96] Altun E, Aydogdu MO, Chung E, et al. (2021) Metal-based nanoparticles for combating antibiotic resistance. Appl Phys Rev 8: 041303. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0060299
    [97] Xiong YQ, Estellés A, Li L, et al. (2017) A human biofilm-disrupting monoclonal antibody potentiates antibiotic efficacy in rodent models of both Staphylococcus aureus and Acinetobacter baumannii infections. Antimicrob Agents Ch 61: e00904-17. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00904-17
    [98] Zhang C, Liang Z, Ma S, et al. (2021) Radiotherapy and cytokine storm: risk and mechanism. Front Oncol 11: 670464. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.670464
    [99] Tavares TD, Ribeiro ARM, Silva C, et al. (2024) Combinatory effect of nisin antimicrobial peptide with bioactive molecules: a review. J Drug Deliv Sci Technol 91: 105246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jddst.2023.105246
    [100] Thorlund K, Haggstrom J, Park JJH, et al. (2018) Key design considerations for adaptive clinical trials: a primer for clinicians. BMJ 360: k698. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k698
    [101] Li R, Zi MJ, Gou ZP, et al. (2019) Pharmacokinetics and safety evaluation in healthy Chinese volunteers of alkaloids from leaf of Alstonia scholaris: a multiple doses phase I clinical trial. Phytomedicine 61: 152828. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phymed.2019.152828
    [102] Huang YT, Kumar SR, Chan HC, et al. (2021) Efficacy of antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) against Escherichia coli and bacteria morphology change after AMP exposure. J Taiwan Inst Chem E 126: 307-312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtice.2021.07.003
    [103] DeGrazio F, Paskiet D (2020) Injectable combination product development: facilitating risk-based assessments for efficiency and patient centric outcomes. J Pharm Sci 109: 2101-2115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xphs.2020.03.020
    [104] Brady D, Grapputo A, Romoli O, et al. (2019) Insect cecropins, antimicrobial peptides with potential therapeutic applications. Int J Mol Sci 20: 5862. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20235862
    [105] Tiwari P, Srivastava Y, Sharma A, et al. (2023) Antimicrobial peptides: The production of novel peptide-based therapeutics in plant systems. Life 13: 1875. https://doi.org/10.3390/life13091875
    [106] Xuan J, Feng W, Wang J, et al. (2023) Antimicrobial peptides for combating drug-resistant bacterial infections. Drug Resist Update 68: 100954. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drup.2023.100954
    [107] Haque M, Islam S, Sheikh MA, et al. (2021) Quorum sensing: a new prospect for the management of antimicrobial-resistant infectious diseases. Expert Rev Anti-Infe 19: 571-586. https://doi.org/10.1080/14787210.2021.1843427
    [108] Moorcroft SCT, Roach L, Jayne DG, et al. (2020) Nanoparticle-loaded hydrogel for the light-activated release and photothermal enhancement of antimicrobial peptides. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 12: 24544-24554. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.9b22587
    [109] Tan P, Fu H, Ma X (2021) Design, optimization, and nanotechnology of antimicrobial peptides: from exploration to applications. Nano Today 39: 101229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nantod.2021.101229
    [110] Mahlapuu M, Björn C, Ekblom J (2020) Antimicrobial peptides as therapeutic agents: opportunities and challenges. Crit Rev Biotechnol 40: 978-992. https://doi.org/10.1080/07388551.2020.1796576
    [111] Zahedifard F, Rafati S (2018) Prospects for antimicrobial peptide-based immunotherapy approaches in Leishmania control. Expert Rev Anti-Infe 16: 461-469. https://doi.org/10.1080/14787210.2018.1483720
    [112] Melicherčík P, Čeřovský V, Nešuta O, et al. (2018) Testing the efficacy of antimicrobial peptides in the topical treatment of induced osteomyelitis in rats. Folia microbiol 63: 97-104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12223-017-0540-9
    [113] Chang WF, Chen SH, Chen YF (2018) Correlation of an antimicrobial peptide's potency and its influences on membrane elasticity. Phys Rev E 98: 042408. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.98.042408
    [114] Fazly Bazzaz BS, Seyedi S, Hoseini Goki N, et al. (2020) Human antimicrobial peptides: spectrum, mode of action and resistance mechanisms. Int J Pept Res Ther 27: 801-816. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10989-020-10127-2
    [115] Talapko J, Meštrović T, Juzbašić M, et al. (2022) Antimicrobial peptides—mechanisms of action, antimicrobial effects and clinical applications. Antibiotics 11: 1417. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11101417
    [116] Luong HX, Thanh TT, Tran TH (2020) Antimicrobial peptides–advances in development of therapeutic applications. Life Sci 260: 118407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lfs.2020.118407
    [117] Yan Y, Li Y, Zhang Z, et al. (2021) Advances of peptides for antibacterial applications. Colloid Surface B 202: 111682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfb.2021.111682
    [118] Jiang Y, Chen Y, Song Z, et al. (2021) Recent advances in design of antimicrobial peptides and polypeptides toward clinical translation. Adv Drug Deliver Rev 170: 261-280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2020.12.016
    [119] Swanson K, Liu G, Catacutan DB, et al. (2024) Generative AI for designing and validating easily synthesizable and structurally novel antibiotics. Nat Mac Intell 6: 338-353. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-024-00809-7
    [120] Pandi A, Adam D, Zare A, et al. (2023) Cell-free biosynthesis combined with deep learning accelerates de novo-development of antimicrobial peptides. Nat Commun 14: 7197. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-42434-9
    [121] Agüero-Chapin G, Galpert-Cañizares D, Domínguez-Pérez D, et al. (2022) Emerging computational approaches for antimicrobial peptide discovery. Antibiotics 11: 936. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11070936
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2025 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(999) PDF downloads(36) Cited by(0)

Figures and Tables

Figures(2)  /  Tables(1)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog