| Literature DB >> 35406309 |
Ioana M Bodea1, Giorgiana M Cătunescu2, Carmen R Pop3, Nicodim I Fiț1, Adriana P David2, Mircea C Dudescu4, Andreea Stănilă3, Ancuța M Rotar3, Florin I Beteg1.
Abstract
The use of bacterial cellulose (BC) as scaffold for active biofilms is one of the most interesting applications, especially for the biomedical and food industries. However, there are currently few studies evaluating the potential of incorporating herbal extracts into various biomaterials, including BC. Thus, the aim of this study is to report a screening of the total phenolic content and antioxidant and antimicrobial activity of ethanolic extracts of oregano, rosemary, parsley, and lovage. At the same time, the bioactive potential of BC enriched with the four ethanolic extracts is described. Microwave-assisted extraction was used to extract bioactive compounds from the four selected herbs. The physical, mechanical, structural, and chemical properties of BC were also assessed. Next, BC was enriched with the extracts, and their effect against Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, and Candida albicans was evaluated. The results showed that the bioactivity of the herbs varied significantly, with rosemary extract being the most bioactive. The BC films possessed good mechanical properties, and a three-dimensional network fibrillar structure appropriate for ethanolic-extract incorporation. The BC samples enriched with rosemary extracts had the highest antibacterial activity against S. aureus, while E. coli. and C. albicans seemed to be resistant to all extracts, regardless of herbs.Entities:
Keywords: ethanol; lovage; microwave-assisted extraction; oregano; parsley; rosemary
Year: 2022 PMID: 35406309 PMCID: PMC9003207 DOI: 10.3390/polym14071435
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Polymers (Basel) ISSN: 2073-4360 Impact factor: 4.329
Extraction conditions of microwave-assisted extraction for parsley, lovage, rosemary, and oregano.
| Sample | Ethanol Concentration | Microwave Power | Extraction Time (s) | Extraction Repetitions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 80 | 800 | 10 | 5 |
| 2 | 60 | 160 | 10 | 1 |
| 3 | 40 | 480 | 40 | 10 |
Total polyphenol content and antioxidant activity of parsley, lovage, rosemary, and oregano by microwave-assisted extraction.
| Botanical Family | Herb | Sample | Ethanol (%) | Microwave Power (W) | Extraction Time | Times Extracted | TPC | AA | I |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Oregano | O1 | 80 | 800 | 10 | 5 | 3213.48 ± 55.13 c | 48.61 ± 1.66 e | 40.39 ± 2.02 d |
| O2 | 60 | 160 | 10 | 1 | 3960.82 ± 94.39 b | 58.54 ± 0.96 d | 46.01 ± 1.18 c | ||
| O3 | 40 | 480 | 40 | 10 | 4314.06 ± 81.33 a | 73.99 ± 1.66 c | 57.05 ± 2.08 b | ||
| rosemary | R1 | 80 | 800 | 10 | 5 | 4230.19 ± 88.30 a | 82.81 ± 0.83 b | 62.04 ± 1.13 a | |
| R2 | 60 | 160 | 10 | 1 | 4240.28 ± 44.77 a | 87.23 ± 1.38 a | 65.01 ± 1.77 a | ||
| R3 | 40 | 480 | 40 | 10 | 4059.91 ± 11.20 b | 58.63 ± 1.57 d | 46.04 ± 1.94 c | ||
|
| lovage | L1 | 80 | 800 | 10 | 5 | 2385.02 ± 21.69 e | 24.15 ± 1.52 g | 16.90 ± 1.89 f |
| L2 | 60 | 160 | 10 | 1 | 2949.17 ± 40.35 d | 25.53 ± 0.97 g | 18.09 ± 1.20 ef | ||
| L3 | 40 | 480 | 40 | 10 | 3015.25 ± 70.02 d | 32.06 ± 1.20 f | 22.08 ± 1.50 e | ||
| parsley | P1 | 80 | 800 | 10 | 5 | 452.90 ± 81.89 h | 6.58 ± 0.57 h | 4.57 ± 0.70 g | |
| P2 | 60 | 160 | 10 | 1 | 600.35 ± 45.25 g | 7.78 ± 1.10 h | 5.77 ± 1.46 g | ||
| P3 | 40 | 480 | 40 | 10 | 747.73 ± 21.32 f | 8.42 ± 1.11 h | 6.20 ± 1.32 g |
Note: The data are presented as mean ± SD (n = 3). TPC = Total polyphenol content; AA = Antioxidant activity; I = percentile radical-scavenging activity; GAE-Gallic acid equivalents; TE = Trolox equivalents; Values with different letters (a–h) in the same column differ significantly (Fisher (LSD), p < 0.05).
Antimicrobial activity of parsley, lovage, rosemary, and oregano extracts against S. aureus, E. coli, and Candida albicans, assessed by the diameter of inhibition zone (DIZ).
| Botanical Family | Herb | Sample | Ethanol (%) | Microwave Power (W) | Extraction Time | Extraction Repetition | DIZ | DIZ | DIZ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Oregano | O1 | 80 | 800 | 10 | 5 | 1.50 ± 0.71 cd | 1.00 ± 0.00 ef | 1.00 ± 0.00 d |
| O2 | 60 | 160 | 10 | 1 | 1.00 ± 0.00 cd | 3.00 ± 1.41 bcd | 1.00 ± 0.00 d | ||
| O3 | 40 | 480 | 40 | 10 | 1.00 ± 0.00 cd | R f | R e | ||
| rosemary | R1 | 80 | 800 | 10 | 5 | 4.00 ± 0.00 b | 3.50 ± 0.71 bc | 2.50 ± 0.71 b | |
| R2 | 60 | 160 | 10 | 1 | 4.50 ± 2.12 b | 4.50 ± 0.71 b | 1.00 ± 0.00 d | ||
| R3 | 40 | 480 | 40 | 10 | 2.00 ± 0.00 c | R f | R e | ||
|
| lovage | L1 | 80 | 800 | 10 | 5 | 1.50 ± 0.71 cd | 1.00 ± 0.00 ef | 1.00 ± 0.00 d |
| L2 | 60 | 160 | 10 | 1 | 1.50 ± 0.71 cd | 1.00 ± 0.00 cde | 1.00 ± 0.00 d | ||
| L3 | 40 | 480 | 40 | 10 | R d | R f | R e | ||
| parsley | P1 | 80 | 800 | 10 | 5 | 1.50 ± 0.71 cd | 1.50 ± 0.71 def | 1.50 ± 0.71 cd | |
| P2 | 60 | 160 | 10 | 1 | 1.50 ± 0.71 cd | 3.00 ± 1.41 bcd | 2.00 ± 0.00 bc | ||
| P3 | 40 | 480 | 40 | 10 | 0.15 ± 0.07 d | R f | R e | ||
| amoxicillin/ | 18.50 ± 0.24 a | 7.00 ± 0.47 a | NA | ||||||
| miconazole | NA | NA | 10.83 ± 0.24 a |
Note: The data are presented as mean ± SD (n = 3). DIZ—diameter of inhibition zone (mm); R—resistant; NA—not applicable. Values with different letters (a–f) in the same column differ significantly (Fisher (LSD), p < 0.05).
Figure 1Principal component analysis (PCA) biplots of the samples and analyzed parameters of ethanolic extracts (axes F1 and F2: 92.24%), where R—rosemary; O—oregano; L—lovage; P—parsley; 1, 2, and 3—sample number according to the extraction procedure (Table 1); TPC—total phenolic content; AA—antioxidant activity; I%—radical-scavenging activity; Et—ethanolic concentration; MP—microwave power; Rep—extraction repetition, T—extraction duration.
Correlations between variables and principal component analysis (PCA) factors, contribution of the variables and squared cosines of the variables.
| PCA Variable | Correlations between Variables and PCA Factors | Contribution of the Variables (%) | Correlations between Variables and PCA Factors | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F1 | F2 | F1 | F2 | F1 | F2 | |
| TPC | 0.82 | −0.52 | 18.50 | 13.94 |
| 0.27 |
| AA | 0.94 | −0.33 | 24.31 | 5.71 |
| 0.11 |
| I% | 0.93 | −0.34 | 23.87 | 6.19 |
| 0.12 |
| DIZ S | 0.84 | 0.39 | 19.51 | 8.06 |
| 0.15 |
| DIZ E | 0.63 | 0.70 | 10.95 | 25.28 | 0.40 |
|
| DIZ C | 0.32 | 0.89 | 2.87 | 40.83 | 0.10 |
|
| Et | 0.20 | 0.67 | 0.04 |
| ||
| MP | −0.11 | −0.03 | 0.01 | 0.00 | ||
| T | −0.29 | −0.79 | 0.09 |
| ||
| Rep | −0.31 | −0.72 | 0.10 |
| ||
Note: Values in bold correspond for each variable to the factor for which the squared cosine is the largest. TPC—total phenolic content; AA—antioxidant activity; I%—radical scavenging activity; Et—ethanolic concentration; MP—microwave power; Rep—extraction repetition, T—extraction duration.
Figure 2The aspect of the bacterial cellulose after purification.
Figure 3The aspect of bacterial cellulose (BC) film: (a) filter-paper-pressed film; (b) native purified BC film; (c) BC enriched with ethanolic herbal extract.
Figure 4Tensile stress plotted by tensile strain of purified BC.
Figure 5SEM images of surface morphology of purified BC. (a) aspect of BC fibrillar network structure; (b) aspect of BC surface morphology.
Figure 6FT-IR spectra of bacterial cellulose (BC) and bacterial cellulose incorporated with rosemary extract (R1BC), lovage extract (L1BC), oregano extract (O1BC), and parsley extract (P1BC).
Tentative assignments of some functional groups on bacterial cellulose (BC), bacterial-cellulose pellicles enriched with ethanolic extracts of rosemary (R1BC), lovage (L1BC), oregano (O1BC), and parsley (P1BC) and ethanolic extracts of rosemary (R1), lovage (L1), oregano (O1), and parsley (P1) by FT-IR.
| Samples Wavenumber (cm−1) | Tentative Assignments | References | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BC | R1BC | R1 | L1BC | L1 | O1BC | O1 | P1BC | P1 | Functional Group | |
| 665 | 663 | 663 | 661 | 663 | 661 | 665 | 663 | C–OH in alcohols of C–O–H bending | [ | |
| 767 | 773 | 767 | 770 | γ C–Har (2C–Har adjacent) out-of-plane deformation of Aromatic groups | [ | |||||
| 815 | 821 | 816 | 820 | |||||||
| 896 | 894 | 896 | 898 | 898 | [ | |||||
| 1002 | 1001 | 1002 | 1001 | 1001 | C–3…O–3 stretching | [ | ||||
| 1029 | 1029 | 1031 | 1030 | 1031 | 1029 | 1029 | 1031 | 1033 | Bending of C–O–H bond of carbohydrates | [ |
| 1043 | 1041 | 1045 | 1041 | [ | ||||||
| 1055 | 1055 | 1055 | 1053 | 1055 | C–O stretching vibrations in primary alcohol; The bending of C–O–H bond of carbohydrates or C–O–C pyranose ring skeletal vibration | [ | ||||
| 1109 | 1107 | 1107 | 1107 | 1107 | C–C bonds of the monomer units of polysaccharide or C–O bending vibration | [ | ||||
| 1112 | 1114 | 1112 | 1114 | [ | ||||||
| 1157 | 1161 | 1161 | 1159 | 1160 | 1159 | 1163 | 1161 | 1166 | C–O–C antisymmetric bridge stretching of 1,4-b-D-glucoside | [ |
| 1203 | 1203 | 1201 | 1207 | 1203 | Unidentified | |||||
| 1276 | 1280 | 1278 | 1269 | 1278 | 1267 | 1278 | 1279 | Ar–O in aryl ethers | [ | |
| 1313 | 1313 | 1313 | 1313 | 1313 | Out-of-plane wagging of the CH2 groups | [ | ||||
| 1334 | 1336 | 1334 | 1334 | 1334 | C–H deformation or O–H in-plane bending | [ | ||||
| 1373 | 1371 | 1359 | 1361 | 1363 | 1359 | 1369 | 1370 | [ | ||
| 1427 | 1425 | 1423 | 1427 | 1425 | CH2 symmetric bending or O–H in plane bending | [ | ||||
| 1450 | 1450 | 1452 | 1450 | Aromatic –C=C– bond | [ | |||||
| 1514 | 1514 | 1512 | 1512 | [ | ||||||
| 1604 | 1600 | 1595 | 1595 | 1600 | 1604 | 1604 | 1606 | Stretching vibration of C–C | [ | |
| - | 1686 | 1697 | 1687 | 1691 | 1660 | [ | ||||
| - | 1732 | 1717 | [ | |||||||
| 2895 | 2895 | 2895 | 2899 | 2894 | C–H stretching of CH2 and CH3 groups | [ | ||||
| - | 2926 | 2927 | 2925 | 2926 | 2924 | 2926 | 2924 | 2926 | CH3 and CH2 in aliphatic compounds, CH anti sym and symmetric or CH3 attached to O or N | [ |
| 3342 | 3342 | 3307 | 3342 | 3304 | 3342 | 3304 | 3342 | 3307 | O–H stretching vibration or | [ |
Note: BC—bacterial cellulose, R1—rosemary ethanolic extract, P1—parsley ethanolic extract, O1—oregano ethanolic extract, L1—lovage ethanolic extract, R1BC—BC pellicles enriched with rosemary ethanolic extract, L1BC—BC pellicles enriched with lovage ethanolic extract, O1BC—BC pellicles enriched with oregano ethanolic extract, P1BC—BC pellicles enriched with parsley ethanolic extract.
Figure 7FT-IR spectra of lovage extract (L1) and bacterial cellulose incorporated with lovage extract (L1BC).
Figure 8FT-IR spectra of oregano extract (O1) and bacterial cellulose incorporated with oregano extract (O1BC).
Antimicrobial activity of bacterial cellulose enriched with parsley, lovage, rosemary, and oregano extracts against S. aureus, E. coli, and Candida albicans.
| Sample | DIZ | DIZ | DIZ |
|---|---|---|---|
| O1 | 1.15 ± 0.5 b | R | R |
| R1 | 5.15 ± 0.5 a | R | R |
| L1 | 2.15 ± 0.5 b | R | R |
| P1 | R | R | R |
| BC | R | R | R |
| amoxicillin/ | 19.5 ± 0.5 | R | NA |
| miconazole | NA | NA | 7.5 ± 0.5 |
Note: The data are presented as mean ± SD (n = 3). DIZ—diameter of inhibition zone (mm), R—resistant; NA—not applicable. Values with different letters (a, b) in the same column differ significantly (Fisher (LSD), p < 0.05).