| Literature DB >> 24040585 |
Willer F Silva1, Samyra G Cecílio, Cintia Lb Magalhães, Jaqueline Ms Ferreira, Antonio H Tótola, Jose C de Magalhaes.
Abstract
The appearance of new antibiotic-resistant bacteria is a societal problem that requires the development of new alternative treatments. Therefore, this work evaluated the antibacterial activity of ethanolic (EHI), dichloromethanic (EDI) and hexanic (EHE) extracts from Aristolochia cymbifera stems and the combination of these extracts with an antimicrobial drug to develop a new antibacterial therapy. The EDI, EHE and EHI extracts were obtained by maceration using three different solvents. The minimal inhibitory concentrations (MIC) of these extracts were determined using the microdilution test to determine the antibacterial potential of these extracts and their combination with streptomycin against Staphylococcus aureus, Bacillus cereus, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Shigella flexneri. The extract dose leading to the cytotoxicity of 50% of the cells (CC50) was evaluated using mammalian cells MA104 and the 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) colorimetric assay. The extracts had a MIC under 500 mg/L and a CC50 lower than 50 mg/L. The antibiotic/extract proportion influenced the antibacterial activity of the mixtures, and the proportion that optimized the antibacterial activity of streptomycin was a mixture that contained 75 percent of extract. This composition included less than 6.5 mg/L of extract and 2.5 mg/L of streptomycin and has potential as a new antibacterial therapy.Entities:
Keywords: Antibacterial activity; Aristolochia cymbifera; Cytotoxicity; Drug discovery; Natural products; Synergism
Year: 2013 PMID: 24040585 PMCID: PMC3771021 DOI: 10.1186/2193-1801-2-430
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Springerplus ISSN: 2193-1801
Figure 1UV/Vis absorption spectra (200 to 900 nm) of EDI, EHE and EHI. EHE showed the smallest absorption band at 316 ± 6 nm. EDI and EHI had similar profiles and showed an absorption band at 400 nm that was not observed in the EHE spectrum.
Minimum inhibitory concentration (mg L) of ethanolic (EHE), dichloromethanic (EDI) and hexanic (EHE) extracts from
| Bacteria | Extracts from | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EDI | EHE | EHI | ||||
| X* | SD † | X* | SD † | X* | SD † | |
| 214.29 | 60.99 | >500 | >500 | 160.71 | 60.99 | |
| 89.29 | 33.41 | 62.50 | 0.00 | 62.50 | 0.00 | |
| 416.67 | 129.10 | 250.00 | 0.00 | 500.00 | 0.00 | |
| 166.67 | 64.55 | 395.83 | 166.15 | 200.00 | 68.47 | |
*X, Average MIC values obtained from replicates.
† SD, standard deviation associated with the average obtained from the replicates.
Figure 2Interaction indexes (II) of the EDI (■), EHE (●) and EHI (▲) extracts as a function of the percentage of streptomycin in the mixture for(a),(b),(c) and(d). The optimum proportion of the mixture was 75% extract (II maximum). There was a large difference in the II of EHE between the B. cereus and the other bacteria. There was no difference in the extracts with regard to the antibacterial activity of streptomycin against K. pneumoniae.
Figure 3Percentage of living MA104 mammalian cells as a function of the concentration of extracts fromdetermined by MTT colorimetric assay. Three curves were obtained by non-linear regression to estimate the CC50 values (mg L1). For EHI (▲), EDI (■) and EHE (●), the CC50 values were 19.29, 23.30 and 40.75 mg L-1, respectively.