| Literature DB >> 36015234 |
Soukaina Razzouk1,2, Mouaad Amine Mazri3, Lamya Jeldi1,2, Bacem Mnasri4, Lahcen Ouahmane2, Mohamed Najib Alfeddy1.
Abstract
The chemical composition and antimicrobial activity of essential oils (EOs) obtained from three medicinal plants of the Moroccan flora were evaluated. The chemical composition of EOs of Thymus leptobotrys, Laurus nobilis and Syzygium aromaticum was determined using a gas chromatograph coupled with mass spectrometry. Carvacrol (75.05%) was the main constituent of T. leptobotrys EOs, while 1,8-cineole (31.48%) and eugenol (82.16%) were the predominant components of L. nobilis and S. aromaticum EOs, respectively. The antimicrobial activity of the EOs was evaluated qualitatively and quantitatively against 18 microbial strains pathogenic to humans by using the disc diffusion method, and by measuring the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimum microbicidal concentration (MMC). The EOs of T. leptobotrys were the most active against the strains tested, with inhibitory zone values ranging from 7.00 to 45.00 mm, and MIC and MMC values ranging from 0.312 to 80.00 mg/mL. In many cases, these EOs exhibited higher antibacterial and antifungal activities than the chemical compounds ciprofloxacin and fluconazole, respectively. This high antimicrobial activity can be ascribed to their richness in carvacrol. The EOs of T. leptobotrys, L. nobilis, and S. aromaticum could be considered a promising alternative to replace chemical antimicrobials, and a readily available natural source of bioactive compounds.Entities:
Keywords: Laurus nobilis; Syzygium aromaticum; Thymus leptobotrys; antibacterial activity; antifungal activity; chemical composition; essential oil
Year: 2022 PMID: 36015234 PMCID: PMC9414133 DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics14081608
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pharmaceutics ISSN: 1999-4923 Impact factor: 6.525
Yield and composition of essential oils.
| Compound | RI 1 | RT 2 | Content (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||
| α-Pinene | 936 | 5.452 | 1.77 | 1.66 | - 3 |
| Sabinene | 975 | 6.183 | - | 4.08 | - |
| β-Pinene | 980 | 6.266 | - | 1.45 | - |
| Camphene | 998 | 5.740 | 1.55 | 12.94 | 0.21 |
| α-Terpinene | 1020 | 7.005 | 0.76 | - | - |
| ρ-Cymene | 1025 | 7.160 | 5.71 | - | - |
| γ-Terpinene | 1059 | 7.849 | 5.79 | - | - |
| 1,8-Cineole | 1069 | 7.323 | - | 31.48 | - |
| Linalool | 1099 | 8.659 | - | 12.13 | - |
| Camphor | 1168 | 9.665 | 2.10 | - | 0.29 |
| 4-Terpineol | 1179 | 10.316 | - | 1.32 | - |
| α-Terpineol | 1196 | 10.571 | - | 7.85 | - |
| Bornyl acetate | 1279 | 12.467 | - | 1.85 | - |
| Carvacrol | 1302 | 12.696 | 75.05 | - | - |
| Thymol | 1316 | 12.483 | 2.46 | - | - |
| Eugenol | 1358 | 13.819 | - | 5.05 | 82.16 |
| Trans-isoeugenol | 1406 | 15.515 | - | 1.88 | - |
| α-Gurjunene | 1407 | 16.408 | 1.12 | - | - |
| β-Elemene | 1417 | 14.517 | - | 1.61 | - |
| Caryophyllene | 1426 | 15.072 | 1.82 | - | 0.79 |
| Aromadendrene | 1445 | 15.423 | 1.13 | - | - |
| Trans-cinnamyl acetate | 1448 | 15.398 | - | 1.37 | - |
| Methyleugenol | 1499 | 14.650 | - | 9.61 | - |
| β-Bisabolene | 1511 | 16.554 | 0.73 | - | - |
| Acetyleugenol | 1521 | 16.855 | - | - | 16.55 |
| Trans-isoelemicin | 1568 | 18.909 | - | 1.69 | - |
| β-Eudesmol | 1635 | 19.051 | - | 0.89 | - |
| (rac)-1,3,6,8-Tetramethylcyclododeca-1,2,6,7-tetraene | 1670 | 19.510 | - | 3.14 | - |
| Yield (%, | 1.79 ± 0.06 | 1.81 ± 0.03 | 13.24 ± 0.01 | ||
1 Retention index measured relative to n-alkanes (C-9 to C-24) on the non-polar DB-5 column. 2 Retention time. 3 Compound not detected.
Diameter of inhibition zones (mm) of essential oils against fungal strains.
| Microorganism | Diameter in mm 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Essential Oils (2 µL/disc) | Positive Control (40 µg/disc) | Negative Control (2 µL/disc) | |||
|
|
|
| Fluconazole | DMSO | |
| 14.00 ± 1.00 d | 27.00 ± 1.00 g | 7.00 ± 0.00 a | 26.00 ± 1.00 f,g | NA 2 | |
| 24.67 ± 0.58 f | 30.67 ± 1.15 h | 10.33 ± 0.58 b | 21.33 ± 0.58 e | NA | |
| 20.33 ± 0.58 e | 30.00 ± 1.00 h | 9.33 ± 0.58 b | 19.33 ± 0.58 e | NA | |
| 25.00 ± 0.00 f | 23.67 ± 0.58 f | 9.00 ± 0.00 b | 18.33 ± 0.58 e | NA | |
| 44.00 ± 1.00 i | 45.00 ± 1.00 i | 12.00 ± 0.00 c | 6.67 ± 0.58 a | NA | |
Data are means ± standard deviations (n = 3). Values followed by the same letters are not significantly different (p > 0.05) by the Tukey’s post-hoc test. 1 Disc diameter included (6 mm). 2 NA: not active.
Figure 1Examples of the antimicrobial activity of plant essential oils by the disc diffusion method. (A) Effect of Thymus leptobotrys on Candida albicans. (B) Effect of Thymus leptobotrys on Candida glabrata. Bars correspond to 1 cm.
Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimum microbicidal concentration (MMC) of essential oils against fungal strains.
| Microorganism | Essential Oils (mg/mL) | Positive Control (µg/mL) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Antimicrobial Activity |
|
|
| Fluconazole | |
| MIC | 5.00 ± 0.00 c | 1.25 ± 0.00 a | 20.00 ± 0.00 e | 0.24 ± 0.00 | |
| MMC | 5.00 ± 0.00 χ | 1.25 ± 0.00 α | 20.00 ± 0.00 δ | 0.24 ± 0.00 | |
| MIC | 2.50 ± 0.00 b | 1.25 ± 0.00 a | 40.00 ± 0.00 f | 0.24 ± 0.00 | |
| MMC | 2.50 ± 0.00 β | 1.25 ± 0.00 α | 40.00 ± 0.00 ε | 0.24 ± 0.00 | |
| MIC | 1.25 ± 0.00 a | 1.25 ± 0.00 a | 40.00 ± 0.00 f | 0.24 ± 0.00 | |
| MMC | 1.25 ± 0.00 α | 1.25 ± 0.00 α | 40.00 ± 0.00 ε | 0.24 ± 0.00 | |
| MIC | 1.25 ± 0.00 a | 1.25 ± 0.00 a | 10.00 ± 0.00 d | 0.24 ± 0.00 | |
| MMC | 2.50 ± 0.00 β | 1.25 ± 0.00 α | 20.00 ± 0.00 δ | 0.24 ± 0.00 | |
| MIC | 1.25 ± 0.00 a | 0.625 ± 0.00 a | 40.00 ± 0.00 f | NA 1 | |
| MMC | 1.25 ± 0.00 α | 0.625 ± 0.00 α | 40.00 ± 0.00 ε | NA | |
Data are means ± standard deviations (n = 3). Values followed by the same letters (for MIC values) or symbols (for MMC values) are not significantly different (p > 0.05) by the Tukey’s post-hoc test. 1 NA: not active.
Diameter of inhibition zones (mm) of essential oils against bacterial strains.
| Microorganism | Diameter in mm 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Essential Oils (2 µL/disc) | Positive Control | Negative Control | |||
|
|
|
| Ciprofloxacin (15 µg/disc) | DMSO | |
| Gram-negative bacteria | |||||
| 12.67 ± 1.15 d,e | 24.33 ± 3.05 h–j | 8.33 ± 0.58 a–c | 26.33 ± 2.30 j | NA 2 | |
| 12.33 ± 0.58 c–e | 20.33 ± 0.58 f,g | 9.33 ± 0.58 a–d | 6.00 ± 0.00 a | NA | |
| 10.00 ± 1.00 a–d | 23.67 ± 0.58 g–j | 8.33 ± 0.58 a–c | 6.00 ± 0.00 a | NA | |
| 11.67 ± 0.58 b–d | 22.33 ± 0.58 g–i | 10.33 ± 0.58 a–d | 10.00 ± 0.00 a–d | NA | |
| 15.00 ± 2.65 e | 21.67 ± 4.93 g,h | 8.00 ± 1.00 a,b | 6.00 ± 0.00 a | NA | |
| 11.33 ± 0.58 b–d | 25.33 ± 1.15 i,j | 9.67 ± 2.89 a–d | 24.67 ± 3.05 h–j | NA | |
| 9.67 ± 0.58 a–d | 20.67 ± 1.52 f,g | 6.00 ± 0. 00 a | 11.67 ± 0.58 b–d | NA | |
| 6.33 ± 0.58 a | 7.00 ± 0.00 a | 6.00 ± 0.00 a | 10.17 ± 0.21 a–d | NA | |
| Gram-positive bacteria | |||||
| 11.67 ± 0.58 b–d | 24.33 ± 1.15 h–j | 7.67 ± 0.58 a,b | 22.67 ± 0.58 g–i | NA | |
| 21.67 ± 0.58 g,h | 36.67 ± 0.58 l | 32.33 ± 0.58 k | 13.97 ± 0.06 d,e | NA | |
| 9.67 ± 1.15 a–d | 22.33 ± 2.08 g–i | 8.00 ± 0.00 a,b | 29.00 ± 1.00 k | NA | |
| 26.33 ± 0.58 j | 31.00 ± 1.73 k | 10.33 ± 0.58 a–d | 12.07 ± 0.12 c–e | NA | |
| 9.00 ± 1.00 a–d | 18.33 ± 1.15 f | 7.67 ± 1.15 a,b | 21.00 ± 2.64 g | NA | |
Data are means ± standard deviations (n = 3). Values in the same column followed by the same letters are not significantly different (p > 0.05) by the Tukey’s post-hoc test. 1 Disc diameter included (6 mm). 2 NA: not active.
Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimum microbicidal concentration (MMC) against bacterial strains.
| Microorganism | Essential Oils (mg/mL) | Positive Control (µg/mL) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Antimicrobial Activity |
|
|
| Ciprofloxacin | |
| Gram-negative bacteria | |||||
|
| MIC | 1.25 ± 0.00 b | 0.312 ± 0.00 a | 10.00 ± 0.00 e | 0.43 ± 0.00 |
| MMC | 2.50 ± 0.00 χ | 0.312 ± 0.00 α | 20.00 ± 0.00 φ | 0.43 ± 0.00 | |
|
| MIC | 5.00 ± 0.00 d | 2.50 ± 0.00 c | 80.00 ± 0.00 h | 0.85 ± 0.00 |
| MMC | 5.00 ± 0.00 δ | 2.50 ± 0.00 χ | 80.00 ± 0.00 η | 0.85 ± 0.00 | |
|
| MIC | 1.25 ± 0.00 b | 0.625 ± 0.00 a | 20.00 ± 0.00 f | 0.85 ± 0.00 |
| MMC | 2.50 ± 0.00 χ | 0.625 ± 0.00 α | 40.00 ± 0.00 γ | 0.85 ± 0.00 | |
|
| MIC | 2.50 ± 0.00 c | 2.50 ± 0.00 c | 20.00 ± 0.00 f | 225.00 ± 0.00 |
| MMC | 2.50 ± 0.00 χ | 2.50 ± 0.00 χ | 20.00 ± 0.00 φ | 225.00 ± 0.00 | |
|
| MIC | 1.25 ± 0.00 b | 0.312 ± 0.00 a | 20.00 ± 0.00 f | 14.06 ± 0.00 |
| MMC | 2.50 ± 0.00 χ | 0.312 ± 0.00 α | 40.00 ± 0.00 γ | 14.06 ± 0.00 | |
|
| MIC | 1.25 ± 0.00 b | 0.625 ± 0.00 a | 20.00 ± 0.00 f | 14.06 ± 0.00 |
| MMC | 2.50 ± 0.00 χ | 0.625 ± 0.00 α | 40.00 ± 0.00 γ | 14.06 ± 0.00 | |
|
| MIC | 1.25 ± 0.00 b | 0.625 ± 0.00 a | 20.00 ± 0.00 f | 3.51 ± 0.00 |
| MMC | 2.50 ± 0.00 χ | 0.625 ± 0.00 α | 20.00 ± 0.00 φ | 3.51 ± 0.00 | |
|
| MIC | 80.00 ± 0.00 h | 80.00 ± 0.00 h | 80.00 ± 0.00 h | 28.12 ± 0.00 |
| MMC | 80.00 ± 0.00 η | 80.00 ± 0.00 η | 80.00 ± 0.00 η | 28.12 ± 0.00 | |
| Gram-positive bacteria | |||||
|
| MIC | 1.25 ± 0.00 b | 0.625 ± 0.00 a | 40.00 ± 0.00 g | 7.03 ± 0.00 |
| MMC | 1.25 ± 0.00 β | 0.625 ± 0.00 α | 40.00 ± 0.00 γ | 7.03 ± 0.00 | |
|
| MIC | 5.00 ± 0.00 d | 1.25 ± 0.00 b | 20.00 ± 0.00 f | 225.00 ± 0.00 |
| MMC | 5.00 ± 0.00 δ | 1.25 ± 0.00 β | 20.00 ± 0.00 φ | 225.00 ± 0.00 | |
|
| MIC | 1.25 ± 0.00 b | 0.312 ± 0.00 a | 10.00 ± 0.00 e | 0.85 ± 0.00 |
| MMC | 2.50 ± 0.00 χ | 0.312 ± 0.00 α | 10.00 ± 0.00 ε | 0.85 ± 0.00 | |
|
| MIC | 5.00 ± 0.00 d | 2.50 ± 0.00 c | 10.00 ± 0.00 e | 225.00 ± 0.00 |
| MMC | 5.00 ± 0.00 δ | 2.50 ± 0.00 χ | 10.00 ± 0.00 ε | 225.00 ± 0.00 | |
|
| MIC | 1.25 ± 0.00 b | 0.625 ± 0.00 a | 40.00 ± 0.00 g | 0.43 ± 0.00 |
| MMC | 2.50 ± 0.00 χ | 0.625 ± 0.00 α | 40.00 ± 0.00 γ | 0.43 ± 0.00 | |
Data are means ± standard deviations (n = 3). Values followed by the same letters (for MIC values) or symbols (for MMC values) are not significantly different (p > 0.05) by the Tukey’s post-hoc test.