| Literature DB >> 34068642 |
Michelina Pusceddu1, Ignazio Floris1, Nicoletta P Mangia1, Alberto Angioni2, Alberto Satta1.
Abstract
The use of natural substances such as essentials oils against bee pathogens is of great interest as an alternative to traditional methods based on synthetic compounds like antibiotics and fungicides, in order to minimize the risk of having toxic residues in hive products and to prevent the development of resistance phenomena. This study evaluated the inhibitory, fungicidal and sporicidal activity of ten essential oils extracted from aromatic plants against Ascosphaera apis, the etiological agent of chalkbrood, an invasive honey bee mycosis. The most effective essential oils were Thymus herba-barona, Thymus capitatus and Cinnamomum zeylanicum, which showed values of minimum fungicidal concentration and minimum sporicidal concentration ranging from 200 to 400 ppm. Carvacrol was the main component of Thymus capitatus and Thymus herba-barona oils, whereas cinnamic aldehyde prevailed in Cinnamomum zeylanicum oil. Further in-apiary studies will allow the evaluation of side effects on bees and residues in hive products.Entities:
Keywords: aromatic plants; biological control; chalkbrood; honey bee diseases
Year: 2021 PMID: 34068642 PMCID: PMC8150519 DOI: 10.3390/vetsci8050080
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Vet Sci ISSN: 2306-7381
Inhibition halo diameter (mean ± SD) of pure essential oils on Ascosphaera apis using the paper disc agar diffusion assay.
| Essential Oils | Inhibition Halo Diameter (mm) |
|---|---|
|
| No growth |
|
| No growth |
|
| 40.0 ± 2.00 a 1 |
| 24.8 ± 0.76 b | |
| 16.0 ± 1.32 c | |
|
| 10.0 ± 1.73 d |
|
| 9.0 ± 1.00 d |
|
| 8.0 ± 0.50 d |
|
| No inhibition |
|
| No inhibition |
| Nystatin | 17.0 ± 1.32 c |
| Control | No inhibition |
1 Means followed by the same letter are significantly different (ANOVA, followed by Tukey post-hoc test, p < 0.01).
Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC), minimum fungicidal concentration (MFC) and minimum sporicidal concentration (MSC) values of the four pure essential oils that showed the highest activity against Ascosphaera apis in the preliminary agar diffusion tests.
| Essential Oils | MIC 1
| MFC 2
| MSC 2
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 100 3 | 300 | 400 |
|
| 100 | 300 | 400 |
|
| 200 | 200 | 400 |
|
| ˗ | ˗ | 500 |
1 Bioassay performed in Sabouraud broth. 2 Bioassay performed in Sabouraud dextrose agar. 3 Values of MIC, MFC and MSC are reported without measures of variability because they were homogeneous in all three replicates.
Chemical characterization (% w/w) of the essential oils that showed the highest activity against Ascosphaera apis by means of gas chromatography–flame ionization detector (GC/FID) and gas chromatography–mass spectrometry analysis (GC/MS).
| Components | CAS Number | r.t. α
| Essential Oils | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| unknown | 5.25 | ˗ β | 1.95 | ˗ | 0.56 | |
| α-Thujene | 2867-05-2 | 5.76 | 1.60 | 1.00 | 1.1 | ˗ |
| α-Pinene | 7785-26-4 | 6.13 | 0.72 | 0.31 | 1.8 | 0.44 |
| Camphene | 79-92-5 | 7.17 | 0.22 | 0.50 | 0.2 | 0.27 |
| Benzaldehyde | 100-52-7 | 7.30 | ˗ | ˗ | 0.2 | ˗ |
| Sabinene | 3387-41-5 | 7.50 | ˗ | ˗ | ˗ | ˗ |
| β-Pinene | 127-91-3 | 7.88 | 0.08 | 2.23 | 0.1 | 0.20 |
| Δ³-Carene | 13466-78-9 | 9.10 | 1.54 | ˗ | ˗ | ˗ |
| β-Mircene | 123-35-3 | 9.14 | 2.11 | 1.05 | - | 0.27 |
| α-Phellandrene | 2243-33-6 | 9.30 | 0.10 | 0.18 | 0.1 | 0.19 |
| α-Terpinene | 99-86-5 | 9.57 | n.d. γ | 1.04 | ˗ | ˗ |
| Limonene | 138-86-3 | 10.28 | 0.97 | ˗ | 0.2 | 1.71 |
| p-Cymene | 99-87-6 | 10.34 | 6.17 | 6.16 | 0.2 | 0.15 |
| 1.8-Cineolo | 470-82-6 | 10.71 | ˗ | 0.96 | ˗ | 0.83 |
| γ-Terpinene | 99-85-4 | 11.80 | 6.33 | 4.49 | ˗ | 0.13 |
| Terpinolene | 586-62-9 | 12.75 | 1.15 | 0.20 | ˗ | ˗ |
| Cinnamic aldehyde | 104-55-2 | 14.72 | ˗ | ˗ | 79.3 | ˗ |
| Terpinil acetate | 80-26-2 | 22.53 | ˗ | ˗ | - | 0.39 |
| Geranyl acetate | 105-87-3 | 22.70 | ˗ | ˗ | - | 0.13 |
| Camphor | 76-22-2 | 23.59 | ˗ | ˗ | 0.1 | ˗ |
| Linalool | 78-70-6 | 23.71 | n.d. | 1.96 | 0.5 | 5.34 |
| 3-Octanol | 589-98-0 | 23.82 | 0.32 | ˗ | ˗ | ˗ |
| α-Thujone | 546-80-5 | 23.98 | ˗ | ˗ | - | ˗ |
| β-Thujone | 471-15-8 | 24.10 | ˗ | ˗ | - | ˗ |
| Bornyl acetate | 5655-61-8 | 24.39 | 0.04 | ˗ | 0.5 | ˗ |
| Farnesol | 4602-84-0 | 24.45 | ˗ | ˗ | 0.2 | ˗ |
| Linalyl acetate | 115-95-7 | 24.51 | ˗ | ˗ | ˗ | 1.47 |
| β-Caryophyllene | 87-44-5 | 24.66 | 5.20 | 2.04 | 0.1 | 0.44 |
| Linalyl isobutirrate | 78-35-3 | 25.21 | ˗ | ˗ | 0.1 | ˗ |
| Terpinen-4-ol | 562-74-3 | 25.52 | 0.22 | 1.26 | ˗ | ˗ |
| γ-Curcumene | 28976-68-3 | 27.50 | ˗ | ˗ | ˗ | 2.05 |
| Curcumene | 644-30-4 | 27.65 | ˗ | ˗ | ˗ | 6.23 |
| α-Terpineol | 98-55-5 | 28.89 | 0.07 | 0.13 | 0.2 | 1.58 |
| Borneol | 464-45-9 | 29.11 | n.d. | 4.25 | 0.2 | ˗ |
| Verbenone | 1196-01-6 | 29.60 | ˗ | ˗ | - | ˗ |
| β-Bisabolene | 495-61-4 | 26.93 | ˗ | ˗ | - | ˗ |
| Carvone | 2244-16-8 | 30.13 | ˗ | 0.84 | ˗ | ˗ |
| Nerol | 106-25-2 | 32.65 | ˗ | ˗ | ˗ | 8.22 |
| Neryl acetate | 141-12-8 | 33.89 | ˗ | ˗ | ˗ | 51.59 |
| Geraniol | 106-24-1 | 34.27 | ˗ | ˗ | 0.2 | ˗ |
| Caryophyllene oxide | 1139-30-6 | 38.41 | 0.22 | 1.23 | ˗ | ˗ |
| Metileugenol | 95-15-2 | 39.44 | ˗ | ˗ | 0.3 | ˗ |
| Neryl propionate | 105-91-9 | 40.12 | ˗ | ˗ | ˗ | 5.51 |
| Eugenol | 97-53-0 | 41.01 | ˗ | ˗ | 11.9 | ˗ |
| β-Eudesmol | 473-15-4 | 42.15 | ˗ | ˗ | ˗ | 2.27 |
| α-Eudesmol | 473-16-5 | 42.89 | ˗ | ˗ | ˗ | 1.06 |
| Cinnamyl alcohol | 104-54-1 | 44.03 | ˗ | ˗ | 0.5 | ˗ |
| Thymol | 89-83-8 | 44.59 | 0.38 | 1.48 | ˗ | 0.16 |
| Carvacrol | 499-75-2 | 45.47 | 68.01 | 60.04 | ˗ | 0.13 |
α retention time. β “-“ indicates that the compound was searched for but not detected in the EO. γ “n.d.” indicates that the compound was searched for and detected but was below the quantification limit.