| Literature DB >> 32235590 |
Marlon Cáceres1, William Hidalgo2, Elena Stashenko2, Rodrigo Torres3, Claudia Ortiz4.
Abstract
Both the ability of bacteria to form biofilms and communicate through quorum sensing allows them to develop different survival or virulence traits that lead to increased bacterial resistance against conventional antibiotic therapy. Here, seventeen essential oils (EOs) were investigated for the antimicrobial, antibiofilm, and anti-quorum sensing activities on Escherichia. coli O157:H7, Escherichia coli O33, and Staphylococcus epidermidis ATCC 12228. All essential oils were isolated from plant material by using hydrodistillation and analyzed by GC-MS. The antimicrobial activity was performed by using the microdilution technique. Subinhibitory concentrations of each EO were assayed for biofilm inhibition in both bacterial strains. Quantification of violacein in Chromobacterium violaceum CV026 was performed for the anti-quorum sensing activity. The cytotoxicity activity of the EOs was evaluated on Vero cell line by using MTT method. Thymol-carvacrol-chemotype (I and II) oils from Lippia origanoides and Thymus vulgaris oil exhibited the higher antimicrobial activity with MIC values of 0.37-0.75 mg/mL. In addition, these EOs strongly inhibited the biofilm formation and violacein (QS) production in a concentration-dependent manner, highlighting thymol-carvacrol-chemotype (II) oil as the best candidate for further studies in antibiotic design and development against bacterial resistance.Entities:
Keywords: Essential oil; biofilm; microbial resistance; pathogenic bacteria; quorum sensing
Year: 2020 PMID: 32235590 PMCID: PMC7235784 DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics9040147
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Antibiotics (Basel) ISSN: 2079-6382
Major chemical constituents present in the EOs assessed. Relative amount of each metabolite is reported in percentage (%).
| Code | Plant Species | Identified Metabolites |
|---|---|---|
| LACA |
| Limonene (29%), β-bourbonone (2.4%), germacrene D (12.2%), carvone (31.3%), and piperitenone (1.5%) |
| LACI |
| Limonene (3.9%), |
| CN |
| Citronellal (11.6%), 2,6-dimethyl-2,6-octadiene (6.1%), β-citronellol (16.9%), and geraniol (17.8%) |
| CM |
| |
| CF |
| Neral (24.5%), geranial (33%), geraniol (7.9%), and geranyl acetate (0.5%) |
| LTC I |
| |
| LTC II |
| γ-Terpinene (5.2%), |
| LOF |
| α-Phellandrene (5.7%), 1,8-cineole (11.6%), |
| RO |
| α-Pinene (12.7%), camphene (7.7%), 1,8-cineole (17.5%), camphor (14.8%), and |
| SO |
| 1,8-Cineole (5.3%), |
| SG |
| α-Pinene (2.6%), |
| TL |
| Estragole (79.9%) y β-myrcene (0.9%). |
| TV |
| γ-Terpinene (9.5%), |
| SV |
| 1-Isopropenyl-4-methyl-1-ciclohexane (24.4%), |
| CO |
| Linalool (11.7%), methyl benzoate (3.7%), benzyl acetate (10.3%), (Z)-cinnamyl acetate (5.4%), and benzyl benzoate (20.8%). |
| EC |
| 1,8-Cineole (8.9%), linalool (6.1%), linalyl butyrate (9.9%), α-terpinyl acetate (45.5%), and |
| CS |
| Limonene (57.5%), linalool (7.9%), 1-octanol (2.1%), |
Minimal inhibitory concentration to inhibit 50% of bacterial population (MIC50) and minimal bactericidal concentration (MBC) (mg/mL) determined for the essential oils assessed. Values are means ±SD of triplicate determinations. ANOVA (p < 0.05) was performed, followed by Tukey’s Test. Different letters indicate significant differences between the tested groups.
| Essential Oil | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| >3–>3 | >3–>3 | >3–>3 | >3–>3 | |
| >3–>3 | >3–>3 | >3–>3 | >3–>3 | |
|
| >3–>3 | >3–>3 | >3–>3 | >3–>3 |
|
| 3 ± 0.22 a–>3 | 3 ± 0.14 a–>3 | 3 ± 0.12 a–>3 | 1,5 ± 0,12 b–3 ± 0.24 a |
|
| >3–>3 | >3–>3 | >3–>3 | 3 ± 0.21 a–>3 |
| 0.75 ± 0.14 b–1.5 ± 0.14 b | 0.75 ± 0.10 b -1.5 ± 0.22 b | 0.37 ± 0.04 c–0.75 ± 0.02 b | 0.75 ± 0.03 b–0.75 ± 0.02 b | |
| 0.37 ± 0.03 c–0.75 ± 0.02 b | 0.75 ± 0.03 b–0.75 ± 0.03 b | 0.37 ± 0.03 c–0.75 ± 0.04 b | 0.37 ± 0.05 c–0.75 ± 0.02 b | |
| 3 ± 0.22 a–>3 | >3–>3 | 3 ± 0.31 a–>3 | 3 ± 0.24 a–3 | |
|
| >3–>3 | >3–>3 | >3–>3 | 3 ± 0.26 a–>3 |
|
| >3–>3 | >3–>3 | >3–>3 | 3 ± 0.28 a–>3 |
|
| >3–>3 | >3–>3 | >3–>3 | >3–>3 |
|
| 3 ± 0.23 a–>3 | 3 ± 0.21 a–>3 | 3 ± 0.24 a- >3 | 1.5 ± 0.16 b–3 ± 0.24 a |
|
| 0.75 ± 0.01 b –1.5 ± 0.12 b | 0.75 ± 0.02 b–1.5 ± 0.12 b | 0.75 ± 0.10 b–0.75 ± 0.12 b | 0.37 ± 0.05 c–0.75± 0.14 b |
|
| >3–>3 | >3–>3 | >3–>3 | 3 ± 0.22 a–>3 |
|
| >3–>3 | >3–>3 | >3–>3 | >3–>3 |
|
| >3–>3 | <3–>3 | >3–>3 | 3 ± 0.32 a–>3 |
|
| >3–>3 | >3–>3 | >3–>3 | 3 ± 0.26 a–>3 |
Figure 1Antibacterial activity of the essential oil “thymol-carvacrol-chemotype (II)” from Lippia origanoides against the growth rate of E. coli O157:H7 (a) and S. epidermidis ATCC 12228 (b). Data are presented as the mean ± SD of absorbance measured at 595 nm.
Figure 2Biofilm inhibition activity of thymol-carvacrol-chemotype (II) oil from Lippia origanoides (at different sub-lethal MIC50 concentrations) against E. coli O33 (black bars), E. coli O157:H7 (light-gray bars), and S. epidermidis (dark-gray bars). Data are presented as mean ± SD of absorbance (at 595 nm). ANOVA (p < 0.05) was performed, followed by Tukey’s Test. Different letters indicate significant differences between the test groups.
Figure 3Anti-biofilm activity of different essential oils (at MIC50/2 concentration) on bacterial strains. E. coli O157:H7 (a), E. coli O33 (b), and S. epidermidis ATCC 12228 (c). Lippia alba carvone chemotype (LACA), Lippia alba citral chemotype (LACI), Cananga odorata (CO), Satureja viminea (SV), Swinglea glutinosa (SG), Salvia officinalis (SO), Cymbopogon nardus (CN), Lippia origanoides felandrene chemotype (LOF), Rosmarinus officinalis (RO), Cymbopogon flexuosus (CF), Citrus sinensis (CS), Elettaria cardamomum (EC), Tagetes lucida (TL), Cymbopogon martini (CM), Lippia origanoides thymol-carvacrol chemotype (I) (LTC I), Thymus vulgaris (TV), and Lippia origanoides thymol-carvacrol chemotype (II) (LTCII). The bars on the graph represent mean ± SD of biofilm inhibition of triplicate experiments. The ANOVA test showed a statically significant difference relative to control (p < 0.05). with a significance level of 95% and a mean comparison Tukey’s test with an α error of 0.05. Different letters indicate significant differences between the test groups.
Figure 4Violacein production in CVO26 bacterial strain during treatment with thymol-carvacrol-chemotype (II) oil from Lippia origanoides. Data are presented as mean ± SD of absorbance (at 595 nm). ANOVA (p < 0.05) was performed, followed by Tukey’s Test. Different letters indicate significant differences between the test groups.
Inhibitory concentration 50 (IC50) and selectivity index (SI) values determined for the selected essential oils.
| Essential oils | Vero cell line | SI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IC50 (mg/mL) ± SD a | R2 b |
| ||||
|
| 0,86 ± 0.12 | 0.97 | −0.54 | −0.54 | −0.54 | −0.24 |
| 0.48 ± 0.02 | 0.99 | −0.19 | −0.19 | −0.19 | −0.19 | |
| 0.83 ± 0.02 | 0.98 | 0.35 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.35 | |
|
| 1.76 ± 0.36 | 0.94 | 0.37 | 0.37 | 0.37 | 0.68 |
a The minimum dilution of essential oils which is capable of inducing cell death or inhibiting the proliferation of 50% of the cells. b Linear correlation coefficient.
Figure 5SEM images of biofilm formation in E. coli O157:H7 (a,c) and S. epidermidis (e,g). Biofilm disruption on E. coli O157:H7 (b,d) and S. epidermidis (f,h) after EO treatment. SEM images were recorded at 2000× and 8000× magnification.