| Literature DB >> 35408683 |
Niclas Neumann1, Miriam Honke1, Maria Povydysh2, Sebastian Guenther1, Christian Schulze1.
Abstract
In the search for alternative treatment options for infections with multi-resistant germs, traditionally used medicinal plants are currently being examined more intensively. In this study, the antimicrobial and anti-biofilm activities of 14 herbal drugs were investigated. Nine of the tested drugs were traditionally used in Europe for treatment of local infections. For comparison, another five drugs monographed in the European Pharmacopoeia were used. Additionally, the total tannin and flavonoid contents of all tested drugs were analyzed. HPLC fingerprints were recorded to obtain further insights into the components of the extracts. The aim of the study was to identify herbal drugs that might be useable for treatment of infectious diseases, even with multidrug resistant E. coli, and to correlate the antimicrobial activity with the total content of tannins and flavonoids. The agar diffusion test and anti-biofilm assay were used to evaluate the antimicrobial potential of different extracts from the plants. Colorimetric methods (from European Pharmacopeia) were used for determination of total tannins and flavonoids. The direct antimicrobial activity of most of the tested extracts was low to moderate. The anti-biofilm activity was found to be down to 10 µg mL-1 for some extracts. Tannin contents between 2.2% and 10.4% of dry weight and total flavonoid contents between 0.1% and 1.6% were found. Correlation analysis indicates that the antimicrobial and the anti-biofilm activity is significantly (p < 0.05) dependent on tannin content, but not on flavonoid content. The data analysis revealed that tannin-rich herbal drugs inhibit pathogens in different ways. Thus, some of the tested herbal drugs might be useable for local infections with multi-resistant biofilm-forming pathogens. For some of the tested drugs, this is the first report about anti-biofilm activity, as well as total tannin and flavonoid content.Entities:
Keywords: E. coli; Epilobium; Filipendula; R. chamaemorus; anti-biofilm; biological activities; ethnobotany; tannins and flavonoids
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35408683 PMCID: PMC9000218 DOI: 10.3390/molecules27072284
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Extract yield, and total tannin and flavonoid content (determined in plant biomass) of the tested medicinal plants.
| Plant (Organ) | Extract Yield (%) | Content (% DW, Mean ± Range) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DCM | MeOH | Water | Tannins | Flavonoids (Boric Acid Method) | Flavonoid (AlCl3 Method) | |
| 4.89 | 65.14 | 3.85 | 3.37 ± 0.09 | 0.32 ± 0.06 | 0.09 ± 0.06 | |
| 12.92 | 51.42 | 3.27 | 7.68 ± 0.67 | 1.20 ± 0.01 | 0.82 ± 0.01 | |
| 0.35 | 19.83 | 2.66 | 2.15 ± 0.25 | 0.32 ± 0.10 | 0.03 ± 0.01 | |
| 8.10 | 20.13 | 7.20 | 5.26 ± 0.09 | 1.06 ± 0.21 | 0.31 ± 0.02 | |
| 0.91 | 12.89 | 3.06 | 2.56 ± 0.19 | 0.09 ± 0.01 | 0.00 ± 0.02 | |
| 4.71 | 38.44 | 8.40 | 10.41 ± 0.78 | 1.92 ± 0.29 | 1.86 ± 0.11 | |
| 3.00 | 47.63 | 7.74 | 7.57 ± 1.42 | 1.90 ± 0.00 | 1.28 ± 0.19 | |
| 4.45 | 18.77 | 13.55 | 3.73 ± 0.48 | 0.60 ± 0.04 | 0.26 ± 0.04 | |
| 2.62 | 19.84 | 3.79 | 5.30 ± 0.13 | 0.87 ± 0.00 | 1.59 ± 0.05 | |
| 4.15 | 13.26 | 2.20 | 4.07 ± 0.28 | 0.14 ± 0.02 | 0.03 ± 0.00 | |
| 0.50 | 31.23 | 5.49 | 7.36 ± 0.80 | 0.02 ± 0.02 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | |
| 2.49 | 10.42 | 2.71 | 3.01 ± 0.05 | 0.10 ± 0.01 | 0.06 ± 0.01 | |
| 5.50 | 29.04 | 10.07 | 8.96 ± 0.26 | 1.17 ± 0.45 | 0.37 ± 0.03 | |
| 0.85 | 28.42 | 7.48 | 8.26 ± 0.87 | 0.15 ± 0.05 | 0.04 ± 0.03 | |
DCM = dichloromethane; MeOH = methanol; 1 = origin: Skt. Petersburg; 2 = origin: purchased from A. Galke GmbH, Bad Grund, Germany; n = 1 (extract yield) or 2 (tannins and flavonoids).
Antimicrobial properties of plant extracts from tannin- and flavonoid-rich medicinal plants.
| Extract | DCM | MeOH | Water | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Test Organism |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
| Plant (Organ) | Inhibition Diameter (mm) | Inhibition Diameter (mm) | Inhibition Diameter (mm) | ||||||||||||||||||
| - | 7 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
| 9 | - | - | - | 9.5 | - | - | 8 | 11 | 8 | - | 8 | - | - | 7 | - | 8 | - | - | - | - | |
| 8 | - | - | 10 | 9 | - | - | 8 | - | 8 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 8 | 9,5 | - | - | |
| 10 | 7 | - | - | - | - | - | - | 11 | - | - | 16 | - | - | - | 10 | - | - | 10 | - | - | |
| - | 9 | - | 8 | - | - | - | - | 11 | - | - | 15 | - | - | - | - | - | - | 12 | - | - | |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 10 | 13 | 12 | 25 | - | - | - | 14 | 11 | - | 18 | - | - | |
| - | 14 | - | - | - | - | - | - | 10 | - | - | 17 | - | - | - | - | - | - | 9.5 | - | - | |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 9.5 | 9 | - | 19 | - | - | - | - | - | - | 12 | - | - | |
| - | - | 9.5 | - | - | - | - | 8 | 12 | 10 | 12 | 8 | - | - | - | 8.5 | 8 | - | - | - | - | |
| 11 | 11 | 8.5 | - | 9.5 | - | - | 9.5 | 9 | 8.5 | - | 14 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 12 | - | - | 12 | - | - | - | - | - | - | 8 | - | - | |
| 8 | 9 | 10 | - | - | - | - | 6.5 | 10 | - | - | - | - | - | - | 9 | - | - | - | - | - | |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 12 | - | - | 16 | - | - | - | 9.5 | - | - | 10 | - | - | |
| - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 12 | 8 | - | 18 | - | - | 10 | 9 | - | - | 16 | - | - | |
Diameter of inhibition zone (in mm) for dichloromethane (DCM), methanol (MeOH), and water extracts. Test organisms: Bacillus subtilis, Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Candida maltosa, Escherichia coli Strain PBio 730, Escherichia coli Strain PBio 729. Mean (n = 2). - = no activity.
Anti-biofilm properties from tannin- and flavonoid-rich medicinal plants.
| Extract | DCM | MeOH | Water | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Test Organism | ||||||
| Plant (Organ) | µg | µg | µg | |||
| - | - | - | - | n.t. | n.t. | |
| - | - | 20 | 50 | 200 | 200 | |
| - | - | - | 200 | - | - | |
| - | - | 30 | 50 | 100 | 100 | |
| - | - | 50 | 80 | 200 | 200 | |
| - | - | 50 | 50 | 100 | 100 | |
| - | - | 30 | 30 | 200 | 200 | |
| - | - | 65 | 100 | 200 | 200 | |
| - | - | 20 | 50 | - | - | |
| - | - | 200 | - | n.t. | n.t. | |
| - | - | 10 | 10 | - | - | |
| - | - | 30 | 50 | 100 | 100 | |
| - | - | 20 | 50 | 100 | 100 | |
| - | - | 20 | 40 | 200 | 200 | |
Minimal active concentration (in µg mL−1) for dichloromethane (DCM), methanol (MeOH), and water extracts. Test organisms: Escherichia coli Strain PBio 730, Escherichia coli Strain PBio 729. Mean (n = 2). - = no activity; n.t. = not tested.
Figure 1Correlation of tannin and flavonoid content with biological activity for methanol extracts. Statistical analysis: Spearman Rank Correlation Test (GraphPad Prism) [32]. Correlation is assumed if correlation coefficient is significantly (p ≤ 0.05) non-zero (Rs > ±0.10) [33].
Figure 2Correlation of anti-biofilm and antimicrobial activity for methanol extracts. Statistical analysis: Spearman Rank Correlation Test (GraphPad prism) [32]. Correlation is assumed if correlation coefficient is significantly (p ≤ 0.05) non-zero (Rs > ±0.10) [33].
Figure 3HPLC fingerprints of the investigated plant extracts at 254 nm (MeOH, each 1 mg mL−1). (A) 1 reference mixture (0.1 mg mL−1); 2 Aronia melanocarpa (fruits), 3 Arctostaphylos uva-ursi (leaves), 4 Cinchona sp. (bark), 5 Comarum palustre (herb), 6 Comarum palustre (rhizome), 7 Epilobium angustifolium (leaves), 8 Filipendula ulmaria (herb). (B) 1 reference mixture (0.1 mg mL−1), 9 Geum rivale (herb), 10 Hamamelis virginiana (leaves), 11 Krameria lappacea (root), 12 Persicaria bistorta (rhizome), 13 Quercus sp. (bark), 14 Rubus chamaemorus (leaves), 15 Sanguisorba officinale (root and rhizome).
Figure 4Scheme for the biofilm inhibition score. 0–4: degree of inhibition.