| Literature DB >> 32545188 |
Marina Ceruso1, Jason A Clement2, Matthew J Todd2, Fangyuan Zhang3, Zuyi Huang3, Aniello Anastasio1, Tiziana Pepe1, Yanhong Liu4.
Abstract
Listeria monocytogenes is a foodborne pathogen responsible for about 1600 illnesses each year in the United States (US) and about 2500 confirmed invasive human cases in European Union (EU) countries. Several technologies and antimicrobials are applied to control the presence of L. monocytogenes in food. Among these, the use of natural antimicrobials is preferred by consumers. This is due to their ability to inhibit the growth of foodborne pathogens but not prompt negative safety concerns. Among natural antimicrobials, plant extracts are used to inactivate L. monocytogenes. However, there is a large amount of these types of extracts, and their active compounds remain unexplored. The aim of this study was to evaluate the antibacterial activity against L. monocytogenes of about 800 plant extracts derived from plants native to different countries worldwide. The minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) were determined, and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was used to verify how the plant extracts affected L. monocytogenes at the microscopic level. Results showed that 12 of the plant extracts had inhibitory activity against L. monocytogenes. Future applications of this study could include the use of these plant extracts as new preservatives to reduce the risk of growth of pathogens and contamination in the food industry from L. monocytogenes.Entities:
Keywords: Listeria monocytogenes; cell damage; food safety; plant extracts
Year: 2020 PMID: 32545188 PMCID: PMC7344723 DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics9060319
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Antibiotics (Basel) ISSN: 2079-6382
The 12 plant extracts with antibacterial effect against Listeria monocytogenes F2365. MIC—minimum inhibitory concentration; USA—United States of America.
| Group | No. | Family | Genus | Species | Extraction Origin (Plant Part) | Geographicorigin | MIC (mg/mL) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1 | Meliaceae |
|
| Leaves | South Africa | 10 |
| 2 | Passifloraceae |
|
| Whole plant | South Africa | 5 | |
| 3 | Lamiaceae |
|
| Whole plant | Georgia | 5 | |
| 4 | Sambucaceae |
|
| Whole plant | Georgia | 10 | |
| B | 5 | Fabaceae |
|
| Root | South Africa | 2.5 |
| 6 | Dracaenaceae |
|
| Root | South Africa | 2.5 | |
| 7 | Fabaceae |
|
| Whole plant | South Africa | 5 | |
| 8 | Fabaceae |
|
| Whole plant | South Africa | 10 | |
| C | 9 | Sarraceniaceae |
|
| Leaves | USA | 10 |
| 10 | Pedaliaceae |
|
| Seed pod | USA | 10 | |
| 11 | Betulaceae |
|
| Leaves + twigs | Georgia | 5 | |
| 12 | Ophioglossaceae |
|
| Root | USA | 5 |
Figure 1Morphology of L. monocytogenes F2365 cells treated with plant extracts No. (1–4) (group A) observed using SEM, in comparison with L. monocytogenes F2365 that was not treated with samples—control (C). White arrows show flagella in (C). The black arrow shows pores in the cell membrane. Number/plant species correspondence is shown in Table 1.
Figure 2Morphology of L. monocytogenes F2365 cells treated with the plant extracts No. (5–8) (group B) observed using SEM, in comparison with L. monocytogenes F2365 that was not treated with samples—control (C). White arrows show flagella in (C).
Figure 3Morphology of L. monocytogenes F2365 cells treated with the plant extracts No. (9–12) (group C) observed using SEM, in comparison with L. monocytogenes F2365 that was not treated with samples—control (C). White arrows show flagella in (C).
Summary of the results obtained by SEM observations of the bacterial cells.
| Group | No. | Genus | Species | MIC (mg/mL) | Cell Damage (SEM) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1 |
|
| 10 | Loss of flagella |
| 2 |
|
| 5 | Loss of flagella, holes in the external bacteria wall | |
| 3 |
|
| 5 | Loss of flagella, severe cell collapse and deformation | |
| 4 |
|
| 10 | Loss of flagella | |
| B | 5 |
|
| 2.5 | Loss of flagella |
| 6 |
|
| 2.5 | Loss of flagella, cell deformation | |
| 7 |
|
| 5 | Loss of flagella | |
| 8 |
|
| 10 | Loss of flagella | |
| C | 9 |
|
| 10 | Loss of flagella, severe cell collapse and deformation |
| 10 |
|
| 10 | Loss of flagella, leakage of intracellular components | |
| 11 |
|
| 5 | Loss of flagella, severe cell collapse and deformation | |
| 12 |
|
| 5 | Cell destruction |
Figure 4Families of the plants and respective percentage of use in this study.
Figure 5Geographic origin of the plants and respective percentage of use in this study.