| Literature DB >> 29382347 |
Izabella Carolina de O Ribeiro1, Emanuelly Gomes A Mariano1, Roberta T Careli1, Franciellen Morais-Costa1, Felipe M de Sant'Anna2, Maximiliano S Pinto1, Marcelo R de Souza2, Eduardo R Duarte3,4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Both diarrhea in calves and mastitis in cows limit cattle production. The bacteria involved in these diseases have shown multi-resistance to antimicrobials, however plant metabolites therefore can provide an alternative method of control. This study selected and characterized Cerrado plant extracts showing inhibitory effects against Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus spp. from cattle. Thirteen leaf extracts were initially screened and diameters of inhibition zones produced against the pathogens were recorded using an agar disk diffusion method. Total condensed tannin contents were determined and antibacterial activities were analyzed after tannin removal from the five selected extracts. The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) and minimum bactericidal concentrations (MBC) were evaluated by macro-dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests, and the extracts were characterized by high performance liquid chromatography.Entities:
Keywords: Antibacterial; Brazilian savannah; Colibacillosis; Mastitis; Medicinal plants; Staphylococcus Aureus; Staphylococcus haemolyticus
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29382347 PMCID: PMC5791213 DOI: 10.1186/s12917-018-1351-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Vet Res ISSN: 1746-6148 Impact factor: 2.741
Bacterial identification by 16S rDNA sequencing and classification according to BLAST (NCBI database)
| Isolates | Origen | Number of analyzed nucleotides | Identification with similarity > 99% |
|---|---|---|---|
| S178 | Cow whit matitis | 551 | |
| S135 | Cow whit matitis | 553 | |
| S182 | Cow whit matitis | 550 | |
| E2 | Calf with diarrhea | 590 | |
| E3 | Calf with diarrhea | 574 |
Antimicrobial sensitivity profiles for Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus haemolyticus, and Escherichia coli isolates from cattle and standard strains
|
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Antibacterial | S135 | S182 | S178 | ATCC | E2 | E3 | ATCC |
| Chloramphenicol | S | S | S | S | S | S | S |
| Erythromycin | S | S | R | S | – | – | – |
| Ampicillin | – | – | – | – | S | I | S |
| Vancomycin | S | S | R | R | – | – | – |
| Oxacillin | S | S | R | R | – | – | – |
| Gentamicin | S | S | S | S | S | I | I |
| Ciprofloxacin | – | – | – | – | S | S | S |
| Tetracycline | S | S | R | S | R | I | R |
| Clindamycin | S | S | R | R | – | – | – |
| Penicillin | S | S | R | R | – | – | – |
| Norfloxacin | – | – | – | – | S | S | S |
chloramphenicol 30 μg, erythromycin 15 μg, ampicillin 10 μg, vancomycin 30 μg, oxacillin 1 μg, gentamicin 10 μg, ciprofloxacin 5 μg, tetracycline 30 μg, clindamycin 2 μg, penicillin 10 μg e norfloxacin 10 μg. S Sensitive, I Intermediate, R Resistant, according to NCCLS (2005)
Selection of vegetal extracts according to inhibition zones (mm) produced in Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, and Staphylococcus haemolyticus after addition of extracts from Cerrado plant leaves in an agar diffusion test
| Vegetal species | Extracts | Tannin content (%) |
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 135 AE | 182 | 178 | ATCC | E2 | E3 | ATCC | |||
| Ethanolic | 1.99 ± 0.12 | 26.7 ± 2.5 | 14.1 ± 1.9 | 30.2 ± 3.4 | 20.2 ± 3.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 19.0 ± 1.9 | |
| Aqueous | 1.37 ± 0.08 | 23.5 ± 3.5 | 14.3 ± 1.8 | 21.8 ± 2.4 | 19.3 ± 2.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 14.2 ± 2.7 | |
| Aqueous | 1.25 ± 0.02 | 24.3 ± 2.6 | 14.0 ± 2,7 | 21.0 ± 2.0 | 23.8 ± 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 16.4 ± 3.7 | |
| Aqueous | 2.66 ± 0.22 | 20.2 ± 2.0 | 11.1 ± 2.6 | 16.2 ± 4.1 | 15.8 ± 3.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 13.8 ± 5.0 | |
|
| Aqueous | 2.59 ± 1.47 | 12.8 ± 2.3 | 0.0 | 15.9 ± 2.7 | 13.1 ± 4.0 | 0.0 | 8.0 ± 3.0 | 0.0 |
|
| Ethanolic | 4.20 ± 2.38 | 9.3 ± 2.1 | 14.5 ± 1.2 | 15.9 ± 3.1 | 14.6 ± 3.4 | 0.0 | 19.8 ± 4.1 | 11.1 ± 3.4 |
|
| Aqueous | 0.23 ± 0.01 | 16.4 ± 2.3 | 0.0 | 19.1 ± 3.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 11.5 ± 2.7 | 29.9 ± 5.5 |
|
| Ethanolic | 1.75 ± 0.21 | 9.0 ± 0.95 | 0.0 | 13.3 ± 3.3 | 17.1 ± 3.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 27.0 ± 4.9 |
|
| Aqueous | 0.16 ± 0.37 | 16.4 ± 2.3 | 18.0 ± 0.3 | 24.1 ± 2.9 | 20.8 ± 3.1 | 9.4 ± 1.0 | 0.0 | 22.3 ± 3.3 |
|
| Ethanolic | 0.72 ± 0.34 | 21.7 ± 3.6 | 21.2 ± 4.3 | 22.5 ± 2.7 | 22.8 ± 2.3 | 0.0 | 16.2 ± 3.4 | 20.6 ± 5.6 |
|
| Ethanolic | 6.37 ± 0.29 | 13.2 ± 2.5 | 11.0 ± 2.2 | 14.5 ± 3.0 | 18.5 ± 4.7 | 0.0 | 10.0 ± 3.0 | 11.7 ± 4.6 |
|
| Ethanolic | 7.36 ± 0.54 | 8.2 ± 1.3 | 0.0 | 10.9 ± 2.0 | 7.5 ± 4.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 15.0 ± 3.8 |
|
| Ethanolic | 0.29 ± 0.02 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 24.2 ± 4.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
Average inhibition zones (mm) produced in an agar diffusion test in Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus haemolyticus, and Escherichia coli treated with leaf extracts from Annona Crassiflora, Caryocar brasiliense, and Schinopsis brasiliensis with (TA) or without (WT) tannins (1.58 mg/mL)
| Bacteria Strainsa | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TA | WT | TA | WT | TA | WT | TA | WT | TA | WT | |
| S135 | 7.3 ± 0,67 Dd | 0 | 8.1 ± 0,11 Ce | 0 | 6.1 ± 0,08 Ed | 0 | 9.4 ± 0,27 Bb | 0 | 10.0 ± 0,18 Ac | 0 |
| S182 | 6.9 ± 0,38 Ce | 0 | 6.5 ± 0,20 Dg | 0 | 6.1 ± 0,11 Ed | 0 | 9.3 ± 0,22 Bb | 0 | 10.8 ± 0,33 Ac | 0 |
| S178 | 8.6 ± 0,47 Dc | 0 | 8.4 ± 0,04 Dd | 0 | 6.1 ± 0,11 Ed | 0 | 9.1 ± 0,29 Bb | 0 | 9.8 ± 0,11 Ac | 0 |
| ATCC 25923 | 7.0 ± 0,06 Ee | 0 | 7.3 ± 0,18 Df | 0 | 9.4 ± 0,4 Cc | 0 | 10.2 ± 0,22 Ba | 0 | 15.1 ± 0,18 Aa | 0 |
| E2 | 9.8 ± 0,31 Ba | 0 | 8.9 ± 0,18 Dc | 0 | 14.1 ± 0,18 Ab | 0 | 6.2 ± 0,07 Ec | 0 | 9.3 ± 0,22 Cc | 0 |
| E3 | 9.5 ± 0,76 Cb | 0 | 9.4 ± 0,27 Db | 0 | 14.8 ± 0,27 Aa | 0 | 6.1 ± 0,15 c | 0 | 12.4 ± 1,44 Bb | 0 |
| ATCC 25922 | 10.1 ± 0,53 Da | 0 | 11.3 ± 0,2 Ca | 0 | 14.5 ± 0,44 Aa | 0 | 8.5 ± 0,29 Ec | 0 | 11.9 ± 0,22 Bb | 0 |
Lowercase letters in lines indicate significant difference between bacteria strains and uppercase letters in columns indicate significant difference between plant extracts as determined by Scoott-Knott’test with a 5% significance
a S. haemolyticus (S135 and S182); S. aureus (S178 and ATCC 25923) and E. coli (E2,E3 and ATCC25922)
Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimum bacterial concentration (MBC) of leaf extracts from Annona Crassiflora, Caryocar brasiliense, and Schinopsis brasiliensis tested on Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus spp. from cattle
| Bacteria strainsa |
|
|
| |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ethanolic mg/mL | Ethanolic mg/mL | Aqueous mg/mL | Ethanolic mg/mL | Aqueous mg/mL | ||||||
| MIC | MBC | MIC | MBC | MIC | MBC | MIC | MBC | MIC | MBC | |
| S135 | 6.24 | 6.24 | 0.27 | > 40.0 | 0.71 | 0.71 | 0.17 | 0.34 | 0.42 | 0.42 |
| S182 | 6.24 | 6.24 | 0.27 | > 40.0 | 0.71 | 0.71 | 0.17 | 0.68 | 0.42 | 0.84 |
| S178 | 6.24 | 6.24 | 0.27 | > 40.0 | 0.71 | > 40.0 | 0.17 | 0.34 | 0.42 | 0.42 |
| ATCC 25923 | 6.24 | 6.24 | 0.27 | > 40.0 | 0.71 | 0.71 | 0.17 | 0.68 | 0.42 | 0.84 |
|
| ||||||||||
| E2 | 6.24 | 6.24 | 0.27 | > 40.0 | 0.71 | > 40.0 | 0.17 | 0.34 | 0.10 | 0.42 |
| E3 | 6.24 | 6.24 | 0.27 | > 40.0 | 0.71 | 0.71 | 0.17 | 0.34 | 0.42 | 0.42 |
| ATCC 25922 | 6.24 | 6.24 | 0.27 | 30.0 | 0.71 | > 40.0 | 0.17 | 0.34 | 0.42 | 0.42 |
aS. haemolyticus (S135 and S182); S. aureus (S178 and ATCC 25923) and E. coli (E2, E3 and ATCC25922)
Fig. 1HPLC chromatographic profile, retention times (RT), and UV (279.3 nn) spectrum characteristics of flavonoids, in panels inside the image, in the ethanolic extract from Annona crassiflora (first RT = 6.484 min).
Fig. 2HPLC chromatographic profiles, retention times (RT), and UV spectrum characteristics of flavonoids in extracts: a Caryocar brasiliense, ethanolic (RT = 1.284 min and UV =274.5); b C. brasiliense, aqueous (RT = 1.378 min and UV=261.5)
Fig. 3HPLC chromatographic profiles, retention times (RT), and UV spectrum characteristics of tannins in extracts: a Schinopsis brasiliensis, ethanolic (RT = 1.053 min and UV = 257.9); b Schinopsis brasiliensis, aqueous (RT = 1.054 min and UV=263.9)