| Literature DB >> 26405620 |
Lawrence Sheringham Borquaye1, Godfred Darko1, Edward Ocansey1, Emmanuel Ankomah1.
Abstract
This study evaluated the antimicrobial and antioxidant activities of crude peptide extracted from Galatea paradoxa (G. paradoxa) and Patella rustica (P. rustica). The extracts were tested against eight strains of bacteria (Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, Bacillus subtilis, Salmonella typhi, Enterococcus feacalis, Klebseilla pneumoniae, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa) and one strain of fungi (Candida albicans) using agar well diffusion and broth dilution assays. The extracts from G. paradoxa demonstrated a high degree of activity against the bacteria strains but were inactive towards the fungus. P. rustica, however, showed a markedly higher antifungal activity but little antibacterial effect. The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) of the extracts determined by the broth tube dilution assay were 17 mg/mL of G. paradoxa against the entire spectrum of microorganisms tested except for C. albicans which was 20 mg/mL. The MIC of the extracts of P. rustica was 13 mg/mL against all the strains of microorganisms tested except for E. feacalis (17 mg/mL), K. pneumoniae (17 mg/mL) and C. albicans (13 mg/mL). Antioxidant activity using the 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) assay showed scavenging ability on the DPPH radical was 56.77 % at 0.39 mg/mL for G. paradoxa and 79.77 % at 0.39 mg/mL for P. rustica. The study indicates that the crude peptide extracts from the two molluscs have promising antimicrobial and antioxidant activities that can be harnessed as leads for potential bioactive compounds.Entities:
Keywords: Bacteria; Bioactive compounds; Freshwater molluscs; Fungi; Marine molluscs
Year: 2015 PMID: 26405620 PMCID: PMC4574042 DOI: 10.1186/s40064-015-1266-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Springerplus ISSN: 2193-1801
Zone of Inhibition (mm) of extracts of Galatea paradoxa and Patella rustica against test microorganisms
|
|
| Positive control (ciprofloxacin) | Negative control (25 % ACN/0.1 % TFA) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 19.7 ± 0.6 | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 36.3 ± 1.2 | – |
|
| 20.0 ± 0.0 | 3.0 ± 0.0 | 14.7 ± 0.6 | – |
|
| 20.3 ± 0.6 | 2.0 ± 0.6 | 19.0 ± 1.0 | – |
|
| 15.3 ± 0.6 | 2.0 ± 1.0 | 35.3 ± 0.6 | – |
|
| 16.0 ± 1.0 | 15.0 ± 1.0 | 34.7 ± 0.6 | – |
|
| 0.0 ± 0.0 | 37.0 ± 1.0 | 41.0 ± 2.0 | – |
|
| 14.7 ± 0.6 | 16.7 ± 1.15 | 35.0 ± 0.0 | – |
|
| 20.3 ± 0.6 | 0.0 ± 0.00 | 15.0 ± 1.7 | – |
|
| 20.3 ± 1.5 | 2.3 ± 1.15 | 35.3 ± 1.2 | – |
Values reported as mean ± standard deviation. Mean of three experiments
Zone in mm indicates the distance from the border of the disc to the edge of the clear zone
ACN acetonitrile, TFA trifluoroacetic acid
Minimum inhibitory concentrations of extracts of Galatea paradoxa and Patella rustica against test microorganisms
| Concentrations (mg/mL) | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||||||||||||
| 23 | 20 | 17 | 13 | 10 | 7 | 3 | 23 | 20 | 17 | 13 | 10 | 7 | 3 | |
|
| – | – | ** | + | + | + | + | – | ** | – | – | + | + | + |
|
| – | – | ** | + | + | + | + | – | ** | – | – | + | + | + |
|
| – | – | ** | + | + | + | + | – | ** | – | – | + | + | + |
|
| – | – | ** | + | + | + | + | – | ** | – | – | + | + | + |
|
| – | – | ** | + | + | + | + | – | – | ** | – | + | + | + |
|
| – | ** | + | + | + | + | + | – | – | – | ** | + | + | + |
|
| – | – | ** | + | + | + | + | – | – | ** | – | + | + | + |
|
| – | – | ** | + | + | + | + | – | ** | – | – | + | + | + |
|
| – | – | ** | + | + | + | + | – | ** | – | – | + | + | + |
(+), indicates microbial growth; (-), indicates inhibition of microbial growth; (**), indicates MIC
Antimicrobial index of crude peptide extracts of Galatea paradoxa and Patella rustica
| Antimicrobial index | |
|---|---|
|
| 2.1 |
|
| 1.2 |
Fig. 1Antimicrobial activity indices of Galatea paradoxa and Patella rustica crude peptide extracts. AI for each extract was obtained by dividing the sum total of weightages by the total number of test microorganisms. Microorganisms were grouped into Gram positive bacteria, Gram negative bacteria and fungi. Data shown as mean ± SD
Fig. 2Antioxidant activity of ascorbic acid and extracts of Galatea paradoxa and Patella rustica. The percent antioxidant activity was obtained at different concentrations of standard and test extracts. The percentage of DPPH scavenging was calculated as follows: DPPH radical scavenging activity (%) = [(Absorbance of control − Absorbance of sample)/Absorbance of control] × 100. Data shown as mean ± SD of three separate experiments