Skip to main content
. 2023 Jun 21;15(6):e40768. doi: 10.7759/cureus.40768

Figure 1. MBC of (A) cinnamon EO, (B) Cajeput EO, (C) their combination, and (D) 0.2% CHX against Staphylococcus aureus.

Figure 1

(A) MBC of cinnamon bark EO against S. aureus. Visible growth was seen in the WN 12.  No growth was seen in the WN 10 (at the concentration of 0.488 mg/mL). This was taken as the MBC value of cinnamon EO against S. aureus. (B) MBC of Cajeput EO against S. aureus. Visible growth was seen in WN 12, WN 10, and WN 8.  No growth was seen in WN 6 (at the concentration of 15.624 mg/mL). This was taken as the MBC value of Cajeput EO against S. aureus. (C) Combination of EOs against S. aureus. Visible growth was seen in WN 12, and sparse growth was seen in WN 10. No growth was seen in WN 8 (at the concentration of 3.906 mg/mL). This was taken as the MBC value of the combination of EOs against S. aureus. (D) 0.2% CHX against S. aureus. Visible growth was seen in WN 12, WN 10, and WN 8, and sparse growth was seen in WN 6. No growth was seen in WN 4. This was taken as the MBC value of 0.2% CHX against S. aureus.

WN, well number; MBC, minimum bactericidal concentration; EO, essential oil