| Literature DB >> 22829829 |
Ling Yien Ing1, Noraziah Mohamad Zin, Atif Sarwar, Haliza Katas.
Abstract
The need of natural antimicrobials is paramount to avoid harmful synthetic chemicals. The study aimed to determine the antifungal activity of natural compound chitosan and its nanoparticles forms against Candida albicans, Fusarium solani and Aspergillus niger. Chitosan nanoparticles were prepared from low (LMW), high molecular weight (HMW) chitosan and its derivative, trimethyl chitosan (TMC). Particle size was increased when chitosan/TMC concentration was increased from 1 to 3 mg/mL. Their zeta potential ranged from +22 to +55 mV. Chitosan nanoparticles prepared from different concentrations of LMW and HMW were also found to serve a better inhibitory activity against C. albicans (MIC(LMW) = 0.25-0.86 mg/mL and MIC(HMW) = 0.6-1.0 mg/mL) and F. solani (MIC(LMW) = 0.86-1.2 mg/mL and MIC(HMW) = 0.5-1.2 mg/mL) compared to the solution form (MIC = 3 mg/mL for both MWs and species). This inhibitory effect was also influenced by particle size and zeta potential of chitosan nanoparticles. Besides, Aspergillus niger was found to be resistant to chitosan nanoparticles except for nanoparticles prepared from higher concentrations of HMW. Antifungal activity of nanoparticles prepared from TMC was negligible. The parent compound therefore could be formulated and applied as a natural antifungal agent into nanoparticles form to enhance its antifungal activity.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22829829 PMCID: PMC3399401 DOI: 10.1155/2012/632698
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Biomater ISSN: 1687-8787
Mean particle size, PDI, and zeta potential of different concentrations (mg/mL) for chitosan and TMC nanoparticles with constant amount of 0.1% w/v TPP before centrifugation, n = 3.
| Chitosan concentration | Particle size (nm) | PDI | Zeta potential (mV) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (mg/mL) | (Mean ± SD) | (Mean ± SD) | (Mean ± SD) | |
| LMW | 1 | 101 ± 9.58∗ | 0.366 ± 0.047 | +35 ± 6.53∗ |
| 2 | 169 ± 13.47∗ | 0.453 ± 0.018 | +43 ± 2.05∗ | |
| 3 | 348 ± 35.74∗ | 0.594 ± 0.121 | +47 ± 4.37∗ | |
|
| ||||
| HMW | 1 | 136 ± 8.64∗ | 0.378 ± 0.073 | +38 ± 1.68∗ |
| 2 | 276 ± 46.77∗ | 0.792 ± 0.167 | +50 ± 1.79∗ | |
| 3 | 1265 ± 206.48∗ | 0.990 ± 0.021 | +55 ± 3.46∗ | |
|
| ||||
| TMC | 1 | 191 ± 21.22∗ | 0.155 ± 0.095 | +22 ± 2.41∗ |
| 2 | 159 ± 3.00∗ | 0.192 ± 0.032 | +28 ± 3.23∗ | |
| 3 | 212 ± 7.31∗ | 0.263 ± 0.030 | +29 ± 4.33∗ | |
∗Significantly different (P < 0.001) between groups for each concentration.
Mean particle size, PDI, and zeta potential of different concentration (mg/mL) for chitosan and TMC nanoparticles with constant amount of 0.1% w/v TPP after centrifugation, n = 3.
| Chitosan concentration | Particle size (nm) | PDI | Zeta potential (mV) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (mg/mL) | (Mean ± SD) | (Mean ± SD) | (Mean ± SD) | |
| LMW | 1 | 174 ± 38.47∗ | 0.457 ± 0.115 | +39 ± 8.56 |
| 2 | 233 ± 41.38 | 0.377 ± 0.093 | +38 ± 1.85∗ | |
| 3 | 255 ± 42.81 | 0.510 ± 0.104 | +48 ± 4.78∗ | |
|
| ||||
| HMW | 1 | 210 ± 24.54∗ | 0.532 ± 0.192 | +40 ± 3.16 |
| 2 | 263 ± 86.44 | 0.551 ± 0.185 | +52 ± 6.27∗ | |
| 3 | 301 ± 72.85 | 0.566 ± 0.176 | +54 ± 5.01∗ | |
|
| ||||
| TMC | 1 | 433 ± 79.59∗ | 0.513 ± 0.123 | +37 ± 2.75 |
| 2 | 211 ± 89.26 | 0.448 ± 0.190 | +33 ± 4.79∗ | |
| 3 | 297 ± 64.72 | 0.243 ± 0.073 | +37 ± 2.52∗ | |
∗Significantly different between groups (P < 0.001) for each concentration.
Figure 1Top: TEM images and particle size distribution of LMW (a, b), HMW (c, d), and TMC (e, f) nanoparticles before centrifugation. Bottom: TEM images and particle size distribution of LMW (g, h), HMW (i, j), and TMC (k, l) nanoparticles after centrifugation. Nanoparticles were prepared from chitosan concentration of 1 mg/mL.
Antifungal activity of chitosan solution and nanoparticles against selected fungi species, n = 3. CS: chitosan; NP: nanoparticles.
| Sample | Particle size | Zeta potential | MIC90 (mg/mL) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (nm) | (mV) |
|
|
| ||
| Amphotericin B (positive control) | — | — | 0.002 | 0.02 | 0.002 | |
| HMW CS solution | — | — | 3 | 3 | 3 | |
| LMW CS solution | 3 | 3 | 3 | |||
| TMC solution | — | — | — | |||
|
| ||||||
| LMW | 174 ± 38.47 | +39 ± 8.56 |
| 1 | — | |
| CS NP prepared from 1 mg/mL CS | HMW | 210 ± 24.54 | +40 ± 3.16 | 1 |
| — |
| TMC | 433 ± 79.59 | +37 ± 2.75 | — | — | — | |
|
| ||||||
| LMW | 233 ± 41.38 | +38 ± 1.85 | 0.8572 | 0.8572 | — | |
| Cs NP prepared from 2 mg/mL CS | HMW | 263 ± 86.44 | +52 ± 6.27 | 0.8572 | 0.8572 |
|
| TMC | 211 ± 89.26 | +33 ± 4.79 | — | — | — | |
|
| ||||||
| LMW | 255 ± 42.81 | +48 ± 4.78 | 0.6072 | 1.2143 | — | |
| Cs NP prepared from 3 mg/mL CS | HMW | 301 ± 72.85 | +54 ± 5.01 | 0.6072 | 1.2143 | 2.4286 |
| TMC | 297 ± 64.72 | +37 ± 2.52 | — | — | — | |