| Literature DB >> 29843708 |
Luca De Vincenti1, Yvana Glasenapp2, Cristina Cattò1, Federica Villa3, Francesca Cappitelli1, Jutta Papenbrock2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Biofilms have great significance in healthcare-associated infections owing to their inherent tolerance and resistance to antimicrobial therapies. New approaches to prevent and treat unwanted biofilms are urgently required. To this end, three seagrass species (Enhalus acoroides, Halophila ovalis and Halodule pinifolia) collected in Vietnam and in India were investigated for their effects in mediating non-lethal interactions on sessile bacterial (Escherichia coli) and fungal (Candida albicans) cultures. The present study was focused on anti-biofilm activities of seagrass extracts, without killing cells.Entities:
Keywords: Antibiofilm activity; Candida albicans; Escherichia coli; Non-lethal concentrations; Seagrass extracts
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29843708 PMCID: PMC5975390 DOI: 10.1186/s12906-018-2232-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Complement Altern Med ISSN: 1472-6882 Impact factor: 3.659
Seagrass species and information about collection sites
| Species | Plant organ | Collection site | GPS | Collection date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Leaf | Nha Trang Bay, Vietnam | 109.209208°E | 19.04.2011 |
|
| Root | Nha Trang Bay, Vietnam | 109.209208°E | 19.04.2011 |
|
| Leaf | Nha Trang Bay, Vietnam | 109.209208°E | 19.04.2011 |
|
| Leaf | Chilika Lagoon, India | 85.418015°E | 16.02.2010 |
Fig. 1Crude methanolic extracts were analyzed for (a) Total phenols in mg gallic acid equivalent (GAE) per g dry mass (DM), (b) Total flavonoids in mg catechin equivalent (CE) per g DM, and (c) ORAC in mg Trolox equivalents (TE) per g DM. Data represent the mean ± SDs and different superscript letters indicate statistically significant differences (Tukey’s HSD, p ≤ 0.05) between the means of three independent measurements. (EAL = Enhalus acoroides leaf; EAR = Enhalus acoroides root; HPL = Halodule pinifolia leaf; HOL = Halophila ovalis leaf)
Fig. 2Chromatograms from E. acoroides leaf extract (a), E. acoroides root extract (b), H. ovalis leaf extract (c) and H. pinifolia leaf extract (d) from minute 0–33. The relative intensity of mass between 100 and 800 Da is shown. Numbers indicate putatively identified substances in Table 2
Individual compounds identified by comparison of MS/MS spectra with database entries in Enhalus acoroides leaf extract (A), E. acoroides root extract (B), Halophila ovalis leaf extract (C) and Halodule pinifolia leaf extract (D)
| No | RT | Mass | MS/MS | Name | Accession | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A - | ||||||
| 1 | 2.5 | 343.03 | 201.02, 157.03, 59.01 | n. i. | – | – |
| 2 | 2.7 | 312.12 | 179.05, 132.06, 89.02 | n. i. | – | – |
| 3 | 3.3 | 367.1 | 277.07, 187.04, 157.03 | n. i. |
|
|
| 4 | 7.2 | 134.04 | 107.03, 92.02 | Adenine | PT200393 | ReSpect |
| 5 | 13.7 | 637.1 | 461.07, 285.04 | Kaempferol-3-glucuronide, mod. | PT209240 | ReSpect |
| 6 | 14.8 | 275.15 | 233.12, 119.05 | n. i. | – | – |
| 7 | 15.2 | 121.03 | 92.02, 77.03 | Benzoic acid | KO000321 | MassBank |
| 8 | 18.6 | 527.02 | 285.04, 241.00, 96.96 | n. i. |
|
|
| 9 | 20.1 | 511.05 | 269.04, 241.00, 96.96 | n. i. |
|
|
| 10 | 20.8 | 187.09 | 169.08, 125.09, 97.06 | Azelaic acid | KO000124 | MassBank |
| 11 | 21.3 | 447.09 | 285.04 | Kaempferol-3-O-glucoside | PS042209 | ReSpect |
| 12 | 22.5 | 461.07 | 285.04 | Kaempferol-3-glucuronide | PS092408 | ReSpect |
| 13 | 27.5 | 285.04 | 151.00, 133.03 | Luteolin | PS040410 | ReSpect |
| 14 | 29.5 | 269.04 | 225.05, 151.00, 117.03 | Apigenin | PT203930 | ReSpect |
| B - | ||||||
| 1 | 2.4 | 343.03 | 201.02, 157.03, 59.01 | n. i. | – | – |
| 2 | 2.7 | 312.12 | 179.05, 132.06, 89.02 | n. i. | – | – |
| 3 | 2.9 | 377.08 | 341.11, 179.05, 119.03, 89.02 | Galactinol dihydrate, mod. | PT211910 | ReSpect |
| 4 | 4.3 | 216.98 | 173.02, 156.98, 136.94, 59.01 | n. i. | – | – |
| 5 | 7.2 | 134.04 | 107.03, 92.02 | Adenine | PT200393 | ReSpect |
| 6 | 9.6 | 577.12 | 451.10, 425.08, 407.07, 289.07, 125.02 | Procyanidin B2 | PT204580 | ReSpect |
| 7 | 12.3 | 289.07 | 245.07, 203.07, 151.04, 109.03 | +(−) Epicatechin | PT204560 | ReSpect |
| 8 | 13.8 | 637.1 | 461.07, 285.04 | Kaempferol-3-glucuronide, mod. | PT209240 | ReSpect |
| 9 | 14.0 | 469.08 | 275.02, 193.05, 178.02, 149.06, 96.96 | n. i. | – | – |
| 10 | 14.8 | 275.15 | 233.12, 119.05 | n. i. | – | – |
| 11 | 15.3 | 121.03 | 92.02, 77.03 | Benzoic acid | KO000321 | MassBank |
| 12 | 20.8 | 187.09 | 169.08, 125.09, 97.06 | Azelaic acid | KO000124 | MassBank |
| 13 | 22.6 | 461.07 | 285.04 | Kaempferol-3-glucuronide | PS092408 | ReSpect |
| 14 | 24.1 | 299.05 | 284.03, 256.03, 133.03 | Kaempferide | PT204030 | ReSpect |
| 15 | 27.5 | 285.04 | 151.00, 133.03 | Luteolin | PS040410 | ReSpect |
| 16 | 29.5 | 269.04 | 225.05, 151.00, 117.03 | Apigenin | PT203930 | ReSpect |
| 17 | 31.2 | 329.23 | 229.14, 211.13, 171.10 | n. i. | – | – |
| C - | ||||||
| 1 | 2.4 | 343.03 | 201.02, 157.03, 59.01 | n. i. | – | – |
| 2 | 2.9 | 377.08 | 341.11, 179.05, 119.03, 89.02 | Galactinol dihydrate, mod. | PT211910 | ReSpect |
| 3 | 4.3 | 216.98 | 173.02, 156.98, 136.94, 59.01 | n. i. | – | – |
| 4 | 13.3 | 261.04 | 217.05, 189.05, 133.02 | n. i. | – | – |
| 5 | 15.5 | 121.03 | 92.02, 77.03 | Benzoic acid | KO000321 | MassBank |
| 6 | 16.3 | 306.17 | 288.16 | n. i. | – | – |
| 7 | 17.5 | 479.08 | 316,02 | Myricetin-3-galactoside | PS092809 | ReSpect |
| 8 | 19.5 | 463.09 | 301,03 | Quercetin-3-O-beta-D-galactoside | PS046509 | ReSpect |
| 9 | 20.8 | 187.09 | 169.08, 125.09, 97.06 | Azelaic acid | KO000124 | MassBank |
| 10 | 21.1 | 317.02 | 271.02, 149.02 | n.i. | – | – |
| 11 | 21.3 | 447.09 | 285.04 | Kaempferol-3-O-glucoside | PS042209 | ReSpect |
| 12 | 23.5 | 301.03 | 255.03, 165.02, 133.03 | n.i. | – | – |
| 13 | 24.1 | 299.05 | 284.03, 256.03, 133.03 | Kaempferide | PS040309 | ReSpect |
| 14 | 25.7 | 285.04 | 239.03, 185.06, 143.05, 117.03 | Kaempferol | PR040027 | MassBank |
| 15 | 27.5 | 285.04 | 285.04, 151.00,133.02 | Luteolin | PT204043 | ReSpect |
| 16 | 29.4 | 269.04 | 225.05, 151.00, 117.03 | Apigenin | PT203930 | ReSpect |
| D - | ||||||
| 1 | 2.4 | 343.03 | 201.02, 157.03, 59.01 | n. i. | – | – |
| 2 | 2.9 | 377.08 | 341.11, 179.05, 119.03, 89.02 | Galactinol dihydrate, mod. | PT211910 | ReSpect |
| 3 | 4.3 | 216.98 | 173.02, 156.98, 136.94, 93.03, 59.01 | n. i. | – | – |
| 4 | 6.6 | 473.07 | 311.04, 293.03, 179.03, 149.01 | n. i. | – | – |
| 5 | 9.6 | 577.12 | 451.10, 425.08, 407.07, 289.07, 125.02 | Procyanidin B2 | PT204580 | ReSpect |
| 6 | 12.1 | 289.07 | 245.07, 203.07, 151.04, 109.03 | +(−) Epicatechin | PT204560 | ReSpect |
| 7 | 14.0 | 469.08 | 275.02, 193.05, 178.02, 149.06, 96.96 | n. i. | – | – |
| 8 | 19.1 | 641.17 | 473.13, 311.07, 167.03 | n. i. | – | – |
| 9 | 19.7 | 549.09 | 505.10, 463.09, 300.02, 271.02, 255.02 | Quercetin-3-(6-malonyl)-glucoside | PT209340 | ReSpect |
| 10 | 20.8 | 187.09 | 169.08, 125.09, 97.06 | Azelaic acid | KO000124 | MassBank |
| 11 | 21.1 | 505.09 | 463.08, 300.02, 271.02 | Quercetin-3-O-beta-D-galactoside, mod. | PT204650 | ReSpect |
| 12 | 21.8 | 463.08 | 300.03, 271.02 | Quercetin-3-O-beta-D-galactoside | PT204650 | ReSpect |
| 13 | 22.4 | 433.07 | 300.02, 271.02, 255.03, 179.00 | Quercetin-3-arabinoside | PT209320 | ReSpect |
| 14 | 23.4 | 447.09 | 284.03, 255.03, 227.03 | Kaempferol-3-glucoside | PT209270 | ReSpect |
| 15 | 24.6 | 417.08 | 284.03, 255.03, 227.03 | Kaempferol-3-O-alpha-L-arabinoside | PT209220 | ReSpect |
| 16 | 26.3 | 301.03 | 178.99, 151.00, 121.03, 107.01 | Quercetin | PT204090 | ReSpect |
| 17 | 27.4 | 285.04 | 199.03, 175.04, 151.00, 133.02 | Luteolin | PT204043 | ReSpect |
| 18 | 27.7 | 315.05 | 300.02, 271.02, 255.03 | Isorhamnetin | PM007432 | ReSpect |
| 19 | 29.5 | 269.04 | 225.05, 151.00, 117.03 | Apigenin | PT203930 | ReSpect |
No = number of peak in Fig. 9, RT = retention time, Mass = mass of precursor ion, MS/MS = fragment spectra obtained at − 30 eV, Accession = accession number in database, Source = database used, n. i. = not identified, mod. = modified
Fig. 9Relative luminescence emitted by Vibrio harveyi in absence (positive control) and in presence of 10 ppm of E. acoroides leaf extract for 24 h. The relative luminescence has been calculated by normalizing luminescence by the number of adhered cells. Stars indicate statistically significant differences (Tukey’s HSD, p ≤ 0.05) between the means of three independent replicates. (C + = Positive control; EAL = Enhalus acoroides leaf)
Fig. 3E. coli (a) and C. albicans (b) planktonic growth without (positive control) and with each seagrass extract at 100 ppm. The positive control was set up with mineral medium supplemented with glucose at 5 g/l. Stars indicate statistically significant differences (Tukey’s HSD, p ≤ 0.05) between the means of three independent replicates. (EAL = Enhalus acoroides leaf; EAR = Enhalus acoroides root; HPL = Halodule pinifolia leaf; HOL = Halophila ovalis leaf; C + = Positive control)
Fig. 4OD-based growth curves of C. albicans in absence (positive control) and in presence of each seagrass extract at 10 and 100 ppm. Maximum specific growth rate (μm) and the goodness of fit (R2) obtained by the Gompertz model. Data represent the mean ± SDs of three independent measurements. Means reported showed no statistically significant differences between the positive control and treated samples (Tukey’s HSD, p ≥ 0.05). (EAL = Enhalus acoroides leaf; EAR = Enhalus acoroides root; HPL = Halodule pinifolia leaf; HOL = Halophila ovalis leaf; C + = Positive control)
Fig. 5OD-based growth curves of E. coli in absence (positive control) and in presence of each seagrass extract at 10 and 100 ppm. Maximum specific growth rate (μm) and the goodness of fit (R2) obtained by the Gompertz model. Data represent the mean ± SDs of three independent measurements. Means reported showed no statistically significant differences between the positive control and treated samples (Tukey’s HSD, p ≥ 0.05). (EAL = Enhalus acoroides leaf; EAR = Enhalus acoroides root; HPL = Halodule pinifolia leaf; HOL = Halophila ovalis leaf; C + = Positive control)
Fig. 6Microplate-based biofilm assay. Percentage reduction of the number of adhered cells of E. coli and C. albicans on hydrophilic and hydrophobic surface in presence of non-lethal concentrations of seagrass extracts. According to post hoc analysis (Tukey’s HSD, p ≤ 0.05), stars indicate statistically significant differences between the means of three independent replicates. In addition, the mean ± SDs of the percentage reduction of the number of adhered cells with seagrass extracts at non-lethal concentrations on hydrophilic and hydrophobic surface are reported in the table. The higher anti-adhesion effect for each microorganism was highlighted. (EAL = Enhalus acoroides leaf; EAR = Enhalus acoroides root; HPL = Halodule pinifolia leaf; HOL = Halophila ovalis leaf)
Fig. 7CDC biofilm growth on polycarbonate coupons (a) and biofilm dispersion rate (b) of C. albicans in absence (positive control) and in presence (treated) of 0.01 ppm of Enhalus acoroides leaf extract. Stars indicate statistically significant differences (Tukey’s HSD, p ≤ 0.05) between the means of three independent replicates. (C + = Positive control; EAL = Enhalus acoroides leaf)
Fig. 8Biofilm growth at the solid/air interface. E. coli biofilm grown on polycarbonate membrane under three experimental conditions: i) treatment 1: growth in contact with 1 ml of LB with 10 ppm of E. acoroides leaf extract; ii) treatment 2: overnight culture grown with 10 ppm of E. acoroides leaf extract and then growth in contact with 1 ml of LB; iii) treatment 3: overnight culture grown with 10 ppm of E. acoroides leaf extract and growth in contact with 1 ml of LB with 10 ppm of E. acoroides leaf extract. In the positive control, microorganisms grew in 1 ml LB inside a basolateral well without the extract. Data obtained were divided by the area of the membrane, and means were reported. The experiment was repeated three times. (T1 = treatment 1; T2 = treatment 2; T3 = treatment 3; C + = Positive control)