| Literature DB >> 35953507 |
Abdelrahman M Khattab1, Hamdy A Abo-Taleb2, Amer M Abdelaziz1, Mohamed A M El-Tabakh3, Mohamed M M El-Feky4, Mohammed Abu-Elghait5.
Abstract
Various studies have shown the importance of using different types of Zooplankton biomasses as an additional substance in the diet of fish. In addition, the drainage water of the fish cultures could be used in plant irrigation. In this study, biomasses of water flea Daphnia magna and Gammarus pulex collected and tested, for the first time, their effect against pathogenic microorganisms and on plant germination. The results showed significant antibacterial activity of D. magna and G. pulex against Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteria, as well as antifungal activity against Alternaria solani and Penicillium expansum, which gives the possibility to be used as biocontrol against these bacteria and plant pathogenic fungi. Furthermore, both animals showed positive activity in the germination rate of Vicia faba seed, reaching 83.0 ± 3.5 and 86.0 ± 3.8%, respectively. In conclusion, the biomasses of D. magna and G. pulex are promising and effective agents for their use in the medical field against some pathogenic microbes and as stimulators of plant growth.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35953507 PMCID: PMC9372163 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-17790-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.996
Biochemical composition of D. magna and G. pulex biomasses.
| Ingredients | ||
|---|---|---|
| Moisture | 6.8 | 6.1 |
| Crude protein (CP, %) | 45.1 | 41.8 |
| Fat or Ether extract (EE, %) | 11.4 | 13.6 |
| Crude fiber (CF, %) | 3.3 | 2.4 |
| Ash (%) | 13.4 | 19.6 |
| Nitrogen-free extract (NFE, %) | 26.8 | 22.6 |
| Total carbohydrate (%) | 22.1 | 25.4 |
| Gross energy (GE, Kcal kg−1) | 4829.45 | 4646.90 |
| Digestible energy (DE, Kcal kg−1) | 3622.09 | 3485.18 |
| NFE = 100—(CP + CF + EE + Ash%); according to Jobling[ |
Figure 1Vitamin and antioxidant content of D. magna and G. pulex.
Antibacterial activity of D. magna and G. pulex presented as the inhibition zone and Minimal inhibition concentration (MIC).
| Tested microorganisms | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inhibition zone (mm) | MIC (mg mL−1) | Inhibition zone (mm) | MIC (mg mL−1) | |
| 0 | NA | 0 | NA | |
| 13.25 ± 0.51 | 2.0 | 16.52 ± 0.33 | 2.0 | |
| 0 | NA | 0 | NA | |
| 11.45 ± 0.32 | 2.0 | 12.22 ± 0.40 | 2.0 | |
NA: No activity. ±: Standard deviation, Gram negative bacteria represented by: Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Gram positive bacteria represented by: Bacillus subtitles and Staphylococcus aureus.
Figure 2Biofilm inhibition activity of D. magna (a) and G. pulex (b) samples, against S. aureus and P. aeruginosa. Significant differences are indicated by * (P < 0.05). crl + : positive control. crl-: negative control.
Antimicrobial activities of D. magna and G. pulex against plant fungal pathogens.
| Tested microorganisms | Inhibition zone (mm) | |
|---|---|---|
| 10.31 ± 0.88 | 10.88 ± 0.72 | |
| 0 | 0 | |
| 0 | 0 | |
| 0 | 0 | |
| 10.41 ± 0.51 | 9.61 ± 0.43 | |
| 0 | 0 | |
Figure 3Effect of different concentrations of D. magna and G. pulex on faba bean (V. faba) seed germination rate and shoot and root length. (a) Seeds in the petri dish with control, D. magna, and G. pulex. (b) The effect of different concentrations of D. magna. (c) The effect of different concentrations of G. pulex. Significant differences are indicated by * (P < 0.01).