L. Suresh et al. / Bioorganic Chemistry 68 (2016) 159–165
163
Table 5
formation and probably may be contributing to the anti-biofilm
activity. The activity data to this regard is shown in Table 5.
In the present study, the biofilm formation in different bacterial
strains including Staphylococcus aureus MTCC 96, Staphylococcus
aureus MLS16 MTCC 2940 and Bacillus subtilis MTCC 121 was
examined in a 96 well microtitre plate. It was noticed that these
strains formed biofilms at either the bottom of the well or at the
air-liquid interface [44]. For performing the assay, the strains
needs to be cultured to attain the required biomass concentration
(1.5 ꢀ 106 cfu/mL) after 24 h incubation and when the test com-
pounds were added at the minimum inhibitory concentration
(MIC) they exhibited inhibitory effect on the biofilm formation
and also showed drastic reduction in the bacterial cell growth,
which was quantified based on the crystal violet assay [43]. From
a mechanistic perspective, the test compounds caused the disrup-
tion and detachment of the biofilm from the surface due to the
destabilization of the EPS, which results in the dispersal of the bac-
terial cells from the biofilm. The dispersed cells were more suscep-
tible to these test compounds resulting in microbial cell death
which was quantified as a decrease in the microbial population
as compared to the untreated biofilms. However, the addition of
test compound below the sub-inhibitory concentration (that is less
than MIC value), did not exhibit much reduction in the bacterial
cell growth as compared to the untreated cells. The results on
the cell biomass and cell growth measurements are depicted in
Table 6 and Fig. 2, respectively. Some of the published reports
illustrate the potential of few small molecule scaffolds such as
halogenated furanones [45], sponge-derived natural alkaloid
Biofilm inhibition assay of the synthesized compounds (4b-c).
Test compounds
IC50 values in (
l
g/mL)
Bacillus
subtilis
MTCC 121
Staphylococcus
aureus
MTCC 96
Staphylococcus
aureus
MLS16 MTCC 2940
4b
4c
8.8 0.32
2.1 0.44
10.5 0.24
8.1 0.29
11.3 0.18
4.5 0.22
Ciprofloxacin
(Standard control)
0.6 0.06
0.5 0.09
0.4 0.07
2.2.1.1. Minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC). Based on the
antibacterial activity results, the compounds 4b and 4c were
screened for the minimum bactericidal concentration [40] against
Staphylococcus aureus MTCC 96, Staphylococcus aureus MLS16
MTCC 2940 and Bacillus subtilis MTCC 121 in comparison to cipro-
floxacin as standard. Compounds 4b and 4c consistently showed
promising minimum bactericidal concentration against all the
tested bacterial strains. The activity data to this regard is shown
in Table 4.
2.2.2. Biofilm inhibition assay
A biofilm is a structured consortium of bacteria embedded in a
self-produced polymeric matrix consisting of polysaccharides, pro-
tein and DNA. Bacterial biofilms cause chronic infections in
humans via hospital and community environments since they
show increased tolerance to antibiotics and disinfectant chemicals
as well as resisting phagocytosis and other components of the
body’s defense system [41]. In the medical sector, bacteria colonize
through adhesion mechanism and result in biofilm formation on
several biomedical implants such as stents, heart valves, vascular
grafts and catheters [42]. In this context, the novel compounds that
can specifically target and inhibit the biofilm formation would be
of significance in comparison to the rational use of antibiotics
and/or biocides. Considering these facts, a further step was under-
taken to investigate whether these compounds exhibit a specific
anti-biofilm activity or whether this observation was simply
related to a general toxic effect on the Gram-positive bacterial
strains. To this regard, the compounds 4b and 4c were screened
for anti-biofilm activity [43] against Staphylococcus aureus MTCC
96, Staphylococcus aureus MLS16 MTCC 2940 and Bacillus subtilis
MTCC 121, which are common and important nosocomial patho-
gens having biofilm forming ability. The results summarized in
Table 5, clearly reveal that not much information on the
structure-activity relationship (SAR) can be highlighted at this
stage; however, it is observed that compound 4c exhibited promis-
derivatives
like
oroidin
and
bromoageliferin
[46–49],
2-aminoimidazoles and imidazopyridinium salts [50] and dichloro-
carbazol derivative [51] which caused the disruption of bacterial
chemical signaling and biofilm formation in some pathogenic
bacteria. These molecules also structurally resembled bacterial
acyl-homoserine lactone (AHL) quorum-sensing molecules [52,53]
and effectively interfered with the quorum signaling, the subse-
quent gene expression and the swarming phenotype [54–56].
3
Control
2.5
7.8 µg/mL
2
3.9 µg/mL
1.5
A
1
0.5
0
12
0
3
6
9
15
18
21
24
ing activity (IC50 values ranged between 2.1 and 8.1 lg/mL)
towards all the tested bacterial species, while compound 4b
Time (h)
showed good activity (IC50 values ranged between 8.8 and
11.3 lg/mL) against all the tested bacterial strains. The basic
thiochromeno[3,4-d]pyrimidine scaffold of these compounds
possesses different substituents which exhibit electron donating
or electron withdrawing properties which antagonize the biofilm
2.5
2
Control
3.9 µg/mL
1.9 µg/mL
1.5
1
B
Table 6
Cell biomass measurement of the Staphylococcus aureus MTCC 96 biofilms treated
with the synthesized compounds (4b and 4c).
0.5
0
Time
Cell dry weight (g/mL)
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
Control
4b (MIC)
4b (<MIC)
4c (MIC)
4c (<MIC)
Time (h)
0
12
24
0.042
0.85
1.2
0.042
0.64
0.71
0.042
0.81
1.08
0.042
0.58
0.64
0.042
0.75
1.01
Fig. 2. Cell growth measurement of Staphylococcus aureus MTCC 96 treated with the
synthesized compounds (A: compound 4b) and (B: compound 4c).