Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
IJSREM66833
Volume:
10 |
8 |
Aug 2026
Pages:
1-4
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.
Department of Pharmacology
Sri Vijay Vidyalaya College of Pharmacy, Dharmapuri, Tamil Nadu, India
Department of Pharmacology
Sri Vijay Vidyalaya College of Pharmacy, Dharmapuri, Tamil Nadu, India
Department of Pharmacology
Sri Vijay Vidyalaya College of Pharmacy, Dharmapuri, Tamil Nadu, India
Department of Pharmacology
Sri Vijay Vidyalaya College of Pharmacy, Dharmapuri, Tamil Nadu, India
Antimicrobial resistance has increased the need for antibacterial candidates with novel molecular targets. The present in silico study comparatively evaluated selected phytoconstituents reported from Volkameria inermis and Butea monosperma against bacterial DNA Gyrase B (GyrB), an essential enzyme involved in bacterial DNA topology. Three compounds from each plant were selected from the GC–MS-derived constituent list and screened by molecular docking using AutoDock Vina against the Staphylococcus aureus GyrB structure PDB ID 3TTZ (1.63 Å). Dodecane, 2,3-anhydro-D-mannosan and heptadecanoic acid from V. inermis showed docking scores of −7.2, −7.4 and −8.5 kcal/mol, respectively. The B. monosperma compounds 4morpholinecarbonitrile, triamcinolone acetonide and 2-acetyl-5-methylfuran showed −4.7, −5.9 and −4.4 kcal/mol, respectively. Heptadecanoic acid showed the most favourable predicted binding among the six compounds. Interaction analysis indicated hydrogen-bond/polar and hydrophobic contacts for the V. inermis compounds, whereas the B. monosperma compounds mainly showed van der Waals and conventional hydrogen-bond interactions. The findings prioritize V. inermisderived compounds, particularly heptadecanoic acid and 2,3-anhydro-D-mannosan, for further experimental validation. However, the docking and toxicity findings are computational predictions and require laboratory confirmation.
KEYWORDS
Comparative molecular docking identified V. inermis as the stronger-performing plant in the present six-compound screening study. Heptadecanoic acid (−8.5 kcal/mol) and 2,3-anhydro-D-mannosan (−7.4 kcal/mol) were the leading predicted binders against S. aureus DNA Gyrase B (PDB 3TTZ). These compounds may be considered preliminary lead candidates for further antibacterial investigation. Nevertheless, the findings remain computational and require experimental validation before any therapeutic conclusions are made.
1. Jorgensen WL. The many roles of computation in drug discovery. Science. 2004;303(5665):1813–1818. 2. Kitchen DB, Decornez H, Furr JR, Bajorath J. Docking and scoring in virtual screening for drug discovery: methods and applications. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2004;3(11):935–949. 3. Gohlke H, Klebe G. Approaches to the description and prediction of the binding affinity of small-molecule ligands to macromolecular receptors. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2002;41(15):2644–2676. 4. Kuntz ID, Blaney JM, Oatley SJ, Langridge R, Ferrin TE. A geometric approach to macromolecule-ligand interactions. J Mol Biol. 1982;161(2):269–288. 5. Halperin I, Ma B, Wolfson H, Nussinov R. Principles of docking: an overview of search algorithms and a guide to scoring functions. Proteins. 2002;47(4):409–443. 6. Morris GM, Goodsell DS, Halliday RS, Huey R, Hart WE, Belew RK, Olson AJ. Automated docking using a Lamarckian genetic algorithm and an empirical binding free energy function. J Comput Chem. 1998;19(14):1639–1662. 7. Rarey M, Kramer B, Lengauer T, Klebe G. A fast flexible docking method using an incremental construction algorithm. J Mol Biol. 1996;261(3):470–489. 8. Cross JB, Thompson DC, Rai BK, Baber JC, Fan KY, Hu Y, Humblet C. Comparison of several molecular docking programs: pose prediction and virtual screening accuracy. J Chem Inf Model. 2009;49(6):1455–1474. 9. Wigley DB, Davies GJ, Dodson EJ, Maxwell A, Dodson G. Crystal structure of an N-terminal fragment of the DNA gyrase B protein. Nature. 1991;351:624–629. 10. Morais Cabral JH, Jackson AP, Smith CV, Shikotra N, Maxwell A, Liddington RC. Crystal structure of the breakagereunion domain of DNA gyrase. Nature. 1997;388(6645):903–906.
Publication Date
8/18/2026
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
0
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
2
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...