| Literature DB >> 35203753 |
Abstract
So far there is no internationally accepted, standardized method for MIC determination of natural substances such as essential oils (EOs). The aim of this study was to elucidate how much the MIC values obtained from various studies using different culture media are comparable. The median MICs for cinnamon essential oil (EO) obtained by broth dilution were 517, 465 and 517 µg/mL for Mueller-Hinton Broth (MHB), Tryptone Soya Broth (TSB) and Brain Heart Infusion (BHI), respectively. The MIC values for oregano EO were significantly (p < 0.001) lower in MHB than in highly nutritious media; the median MICs were 616 µg/mL for MHB and 474 µg/mL for TSB and BHI. This statistically significant difference was noted for all the pathogens studied (Salmonella Enteritidis, Escherichia coli O157, Listeria monocytogenes, Staphylococcus aureus). In the presence of oregano EO lag phase was also much less prolonged in MHB (by 6-17%) than in the other media (by 92-189%). Some components of EOs may bind to starch in MHB; since the phenomenon seems to be selective and EO dependent, the use of MHB for comparison of antimicrobial properties of various EOs thus cannot be recommended.Entities:
Keywords: antimicrobial activity; broth microdilution method; essential oil; growth kinetics; minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC)
Year: 2022 PMID: 35203753 PMCID: PMC8868168 DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics11020150
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Antibiotics (Basel) ISSN: 2079-6382
Differences in MIC (µg/mL) between various essential oils and growth media (n = 24).
| Medium | Oregano Essential Oil | Cinnamon Essential Oil | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | Median | Min–Max | Mean | Median | Min–Max | |
| TSB | 466 | 474 Aa | 379–569 | 461 | 465 Aa | 310–620 |
| BHI | 482 | 474 Aa | 379–664 | 530 | 517 Ba | 414–620 |
| MHB | 604 | 616 Ba | 474–758 | 470 | 517 Ab | 310–620 |
MIC, minimum inhibitory concentration; TSB, tryptone soya broth; BHI, brain heart infusion; MHB, Mueller–Hinton broth; min, minimal value; max, maximal value; a,b mark statistically significant differences within a row; A,B mark statistically significant differences within a column.
Comparison of the liquid media composition [g/L].
| Broth | Proteinous Components | Glucose | Starch | Phosphate Buffer | NaCl | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BHI | 12.5 | Brain infusion solids | 2.0 | - | 2.5 | 5.0 |
| 5.0 | Beef heart infusion solids | |||||
| 10.5 | Proteose peptone | |||||
| TSB | 17.0 | Pancreatic digest of casein | 2.5 | - | 2.5 | 5.0 |
| 3.0 | Enzymatic digest of soya | |||||
| MHB | 300.0 | Beef infusion | - | 1.5 | - | - |
| 17.5 | Casein hydrolysate | |||||
Comparison of growth model parameters for various media (mean ± SEM of three measurements).
| Strain | Medium | OEO | λ | μmax | RMSE | Δ λ | Δ μmax |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TSB | 0 | 3.47 ± 0.34 | 0.37 ± 0.03 | 0.04 ± 0.00 | +189% | −70% | |
| 284 | 10.04 ± 0.56 | 0.11 ± 0.02 | 0.04 ± 0.01 | ||||
| BHI | 0 | 4.59 ± 0.31 | 0.30 ± 0.01 | 0.03 ± 0.00 | +92% | −60% | |
| 284 | 8.81 ± 0.50 | 0.12 ± 0.01 | 0.05 ± 0.01 | ||||
| MHB | 0 | 5.15 ± 0.37 | 0.10 ± 0.01 | 0.02 ± 0.00 | +17% | −30% | |
| 284 | 6.01 ± 0.41 | 0.07 ± 0.01 | 0.03 ± 0.00 | ||||
| TSB | 0 | 3.43 ± 0.36 | 0.27 ± 0.03 | 0.02 ± 0.01 | +172% | −59% | |
| 284 | 9.35 ± 0.49 | 0.11 ± 0.01 | 0.04 ± 0.01 | ||||
| BHI | 0 | 3.88 ± 0.35 | 0.27 ± 0.04 | 0.02 ± 0.00 | +113% | −41% | |
| 284 | 8.72 ± 0.58 | 0.16 ± 0.02 | 0.05 ± 0.01 | ||||
| MHB | 0 | 4.29 ± 0.41 | 0.19 ± 0.02 | 0.03 ± 0.01 | +6% | −26% | |
| 284 | 4.54 ± 0.53 | 0.14 ± 0.04 | 0.01 ± 0.01 |
SEM standard error of the mean; OEO, oregano essential oil; λ, lag phase duration estimation; μmax, maximum specific growth rate estimation; RMSE, root-mean-square error (OD units); Δ increase/decrease of the parameter in OEO in comparison to control.
Figure 1Differences in MIC between reference strains and mixtures of food isolates (LM, Listeria monocytogenes; SE, Salmonella Enteritidis; EC, Escherichia coli O157; SA, Staphylococcus aureus).
Differences in MIC (µg/mL) between various essential oils and pathogens (n = 18).
| Medium | Oregano Essential Oil | Cinnamon Essential Oil | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | Median | Min–Max | Mean | Median | Min–Max | |
| 442 | 474 Aa | 379–569 | 506 | 517 Aa | 310–620 | |
| 500 | 474 ABa | 379–664 | 494 | 517 Aa | 310–620 | |
|
| 569 | 569 Ba | 474–758 | 483 | 517 Ab | 310–620 |
|
| 558 | 569 Ba | 379–664 | 465 | 414 Ab | 310–620 |
MIC, minimum inhibitory concentration; min, minimal value; max, maximal value; a,b mark statistically significant differences within a row; A,B mark statistically significant differences within a column.
Figure 2Differences in MIC between essential oils, growth media and pathogens (LM, Listeria monocytogenes; SE, Salmonella Enteritidis; EC, Escherichia coli O157; SA, Staphylococcus aureus). (a) Oregano essential oil; (b) cinnamon essential oil.
Bacterial isolates used in the study.
| Species | Specification | Isolated | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| serotype O157 | 2015 | pork meat preparation |
|
| serotype O157 | 2017 | wild boar carcass |
|
| serotype O157 | 2017 | wild boar carcass |
|
| serotype O157 | 2018 | sushi |
|
| serotype O157 | 2019 | duck carcass |
|
| serotype 1/2a | 2014 | chicken carcass |
|
| serotype 1/2a | 2014 | chicken carcass |
|
| serotype 1/2b | 2018 | cooked meat product |
|
| serotype 1/2b | 2018 | cooked meat product |
|
| serotype 1/2c | 2015 | pork meat preparation |
|
| phage type 1b | 2015 | poultry meat preparation |
|
| phage type 4 | 2015 | poultry meat preparation |
|
| phage type 4b | 2016 | minced turkey meat |
|
| phage type 8 | 2014 | chicken carcass |
|
| phage type 13 | 2014 | chicken carcass |
|
| - | 2015 | pork meat preparation |
|
| - | 2015 | cooked meat product |
|
| - | 2019 | duck carcass |
|
| - | 2019 | duck carcass |
|
| - | 2018 | cooked meat product |
Figure A1Analytical certificates. (a) chemical composition of cinnamon essential oil; (b) chemical composition of oregano essential oil.