ArticleChemistryOpen2026
Computational Study on Potentially Active Antibacterial Compounds in Secondary Metabolites of Extremophilic Microorganisms.
Article in ChemistryOpen, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The density functional theory (DFT) method ωB97XD/6-311+G(2d, p) was employed to perform systematic theoretical calculations and comparative analyses on the geometric structures, spectroscopic properties, frontier molecular orbitals, and molecular electrostatic potentials of potential antibacterial compounds derived from 16-membered lactone ring-containing secondary metabolites of extremophiles, as well as midecamycin. The reactivity indices of these compounds were further investigated within the framework of conceptual DFT. Additionally, drug-likeness was evaluated using two independent pharmacokinetic prediction platforms, and molecular docking simulations were conducted to assess their binding affinities. The results indicate that the carboxyl hydrogen, hydroxyl hydrogen, and carbonyl oxygen atoms in these molecules exhibit relatively high reactivity. Compound 3 displays relatively high chemical reactivity, whereas compounds 6 and 9 demonstrate superior chemical stability combined with significant reactivity. Pharmacokinetic predictions reveal poor Caco-2 permeability for compounds 8 and 9, low therapeutic indices for compounds 2 and 3, and the highest metabolic stability in human liver microsomes for compound 7. Overall, compound 1 exhibits the highest structural and physicochemical similarity to midecamycin. Compound 1 was evaluated for molecular docking with the 50S ribosomal subunit from Streptomyces bacteria; the molecular docking results confirm its distinct binding affinity, despite a slightly higher binding energy. The molecular dynamics simulation results indicate that complex 1 exhibits a Gibbs free energy of -30.76 kJ/mol, further supporting its structural stability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.