| Literature DB >> 33810520 |
Jose Gustavo De la Ossa1,2,3, Hani El Kadri2, Jorge Gutierrez-Merino4, Thomas Wantock5, Thomas Harle5, Maurizia Seggiani6, Serena Danti6, Rossella Di Stefano3,7, Eirini Velliou2,8.
Abstract
A novel strategy involving Olive Leaf Extract (Entities:
Keywords: E. coli; L. innocua; S. aureus; antibacterial; food contamination; green technology; olive tree; polyphenols
Year: 2021 PMID: 33810520 PMCID: PMC8037246 DOI: 10.3390/molecules26071890
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Bacterial growth inhibition studies with olive leaf extract (OLE) treatment on bacteria strains.
| Bacterial Species | Olive Variety and Origin | OLE Extraction Method | OLE Concentration | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Aqueous | 30 µL OLE; 15% ( | [ | |
|
| Aqueous | 5 mg/mL | [ | |
|
| Aqueous | 5 mg/mL | [ | |
|
|
| Ethanol | 27.2 ± 0.99 mg/g | [ |
|
| Aqueous | 5 mg/mL | [ | |
|
| n.a. | n.a. | [ | |
|
| n.a. | n.a. | [ | |
|
| Water, ethanol. | Variable | [ | |
|
| Methanol/water | 198.7 ± 3.6 mg GAE/g | [ | |
|
| Commercial extract (USA) | Water/ethanol | 62.5 mg/mL | [ |
Figure 1Bar graphs showing the effect of OLE administration at 100 mg/mL total polyphenols (TPs) on the growth of different bacterial strains: (a) E. coli, (b) S. aureus, (c) L. innocua, up to 24 h. The values are reported as mean ± standard error of the mean (SEM) (n = 3), significance at p < 0.05 by One-way ANOVA and Tukey′s HSD post hoc test; *** p < 0.0001, n.s. not significant.
Concentration of the main polyphenols in OLE.
| OLE Composition | Concentration (mg/g OLE) |
|---|---|
| Oleuropein | 32.64 ± 3.06 |
| Luteolin-7-O-glucoside | 6.97 ± 0.24 |
| Rutin | 3.37 ± 0.33 |
| Apigenin-7-O-glucoside | 1.97 ± 0.17 |
| Hydroxy-tyrosol | 0.85 ± 0.08 |
| Caffeic acid | 0.18 ± 0.02 |
Figure 2The effects of Cold Atmospheric Plasma (CAP) (1 min exposure time) and/or OLE on E. coli. The values are reported as mean ± standard error of the mean (SEM) (n = 3), significance at p < 0.05 by One-way ANOVA and Tukey′s HSD post hoc test; ** p < 0.001, *** p < 0.0001, n.s. not significant.
Figure 3The effects of CAP (1 min exposure time) and/or OLE on S. aureus. The values are reported as mean ± standard error of the mean (SEM) (n = 3), significance at p < 0.05 by One-way ANOVA and Tukey′s HSD post hoc test; * p < 0.01, ** p < 0.001, *** p < 0.0001, n.s. not significant.
Figure 4The effects of CAP (1 min exposure time) and/or OLE on L. innocua. The values are reported as mean ± standard error of the mean (SEM) (n = 3), significance at p < 0.05 by One-way ANOVA and Tukey’s HSD post hoc test; *** p < 0.0001, n.s. not significant.