Abstract
Aim:
The aim of the study is to investigate the antibacterial activity of 10 volatile oils extracted from medicinal plants, including galangal (Alpinia galanga Linn.), ginger (Zingiber officinale), plai (Zingiber cassumunar Roxb.), lime (Citrus aurantifolia), kaffir lime (Citrus hystrix DC.), sweet basil (Ocimum basilicum Linn.), tree basil (Ocimum gratissimum), lemongrass (Cymbopogon citratus DC.), clove (Syzygium aromaticum), and cinnamon (Cinnamomum verum) against four standard strains of Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Acinetobacter baumannii, and 30 clinical isolates of multidrug-resistant A. baumannii (MDR-A. baumannii).
Materials and Methods:
Agar diffusion, minimum inhibitory concentration, and minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC) were employed for the determination of bactericidal activity of water distilled medicinal plants. Tea tree oil (Melaleuca alternifolia) was used as positive control in this study.
Results:
The results indicated the volatile oil extracted from cinnamon exhibited potent antibacterial activity against the most common human pathogens, S. aureus, E. coli, P. aeruginosa, and A. baumannii. Most of volatile oil extracts were less effective against non-fermentative bacteria, P. aeruginosa. In addition, volatile oil extracted from cinnamon, clove, and tree basil possessed potent bactericidal activity against MDR-A. baumannii with MBC90 of 0.5, 1, and 2 mg/mL, respectively.
Conclusions:
The volatile oil extracts would be useful as alternative natural product for the treatment of the most common human pathogens and MDR-A. baumannii infections.
KEY WORDS: Medicinal plant, multidrug-resistant-Acinetobacter baumannii, volatile oil
INTRODUCTION
Acinetobacter baumannii is one of the most important drug-resistant pathogens worldwide. Recently, the World Health Organization indicated that drug-resistant A. baumannii is defined as the first priority pathogen, in which researches and developments for new antibiotics are urgently needed [1]. The bacteria has been revealed to persist on dry surfaces for a month and presented several drug-resistant mechanisms including drug efflux pumps, drug-inactivating enzymes, and drug target mutations [2]. Infected patients have many serious diseases including septicemia, pneumonia, and urinary tract infections [2,3]. The number of global drug-resistant A. baumannii was vary in estimation [4]; therefore, the high prevalence accounted to be approximately 54% and 77% of A. baumannii isolates have been revealed in Italy and India, respectively [5,6]. In Thailand, surveillance in the 2010 period indicated the rate of multidrug-resistant (MDR)-A. baumannii collected from clinical specimens was approximately 59% [7]. Regarding the limit of antibiotic treatment, many studies have focused on the alternative drugs and phytomedicine. Several studies revealed the effectiveness of extracted herbs on drug-resistant pathogens including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, vancomycin-resistant enterococci, and MDR-A. baumannii, whereas the antimicrobial activity of volatile oils extracts was rarely reported [8,9]. Herein, 10 volatile oils extracted from various medicinal plants were determined for their inhibitory effect on the growth of the most common human pathogens and MDR-A. baumannii.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Bacterial Strains
S. aureus ATCC 25923, Escherichia coli ATCC 25922, Pseudomonas aeruginosa ATCC 27853, and A. baumannii ATCC 19606 were purchased from the Department of Medical Sciences, Ministry of Public Health, Thailand. 30 clinical isolates of MDR-A. baumannii were collected from the Diagnostic Laboratory, Maharaj Nakorn Chiang Mai Hospital, Chiang Mai, Thailand, during February-April, 2012. Both biochemical tests followed by Constantiniu et al. [10] and molecular biology test using amplified ribosomal DNA-restriction enzyme analysis were performed for identification of A. baumannii. Primers used for 16S rDNA gene amplification were designed as followed by the previous report [11]. The antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed using disk diffusion method following the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guidelines [12,13]. The MDR was defined according to the unsusceptible of at least one in three agents of antimicrobial classes [14]. All 30 clinical isolates resisted to eight antibiotics in six antimicrobial classes consisting of amikacin, piperacillin/tazobactam, ciprofloxacin, cefoperazone/sulbactam, ceftazidime, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole, imipenem, and meropenem.
Volatile Oils Extraction
Volatile oils were extracted from 10 medicinal plants by water distillation. Galangal, ginger, plai, lime, kaffir lime, sweet basil, tree basil, lemongrass, clove, and cinnamon were selected in this study [Table 1]. The material was subjected to hydrodistillation using a Clevenger-type glass apparatus for 3-5 h [15]. Yields of the volatile oils obtained from the plants were calculated as the percent yield. All volatile oils were stored at 4°C until used.
Table 1.
Medicinal plants used in this study
Antibacterial Activity Testing
The antimicrobial activity testing was modified from Prabuseenivasan et al. [16]. Briefly, bacterial suspension was adjusted to McFarland standard No. 0.5 (1 × 108 CFU/mL) and spread over the Mueller-Hinton agar (MHA) plates using a sterile cotton swab. Each volatile oil was dissolved in 10% aqueous dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) with 0.5% v/v Tween 80 and sterilized by filtration. Sterilized disks (Whatman No. 5, 6 mm diameter) were impregnated with 20 μL of volatile oils and placed on the surface of MHA. The volatile dissolving buffer (10% aqueous DMSO, 0.5% v/v Tween 80) and tea tree oil were used as negative and positive control, respectively. After incubation at 37°C for 16-18 h, the inhibition zone was measured. All experiments were performed independently in triplicate and mean value was calculated.
Determination of Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC) and Minimum Bactericidal Concentration (MBC)
Based on CLSI guidelines, MICs were determined by using broth microdilution method [17]. The preparation of water-insoluble volatile oils was slightly modified from the recommended CLSI guidelines. Each volatile oil was dissolved with 50% DMSO and serial 2-fold diluted in a 96-well microtiter plate ranging from 0.125 to 8 mg/mL. The bacterial suspension was diluted into approximately 1 × 106 CFU/mL, and 100 μL of bacterial suspension was applied to each well. The inoculum with 2.5% DMSO and media without inoculum were used as cell and media control, respectively. The microplates were incubated at 35°C for 20 h. Due to the turbidity of volatile oil suspensions, iodonitrotetrazolium chloride (INT) (BioChemica) was used as color indicator to visualize the bacterial growth [18]. The MIC was detected after added 50 μL of 0.2 mg/mL INT and further incubated at 35°C for 30 min. To determine the MBC, 10 μL of bacterial inoculums were taken aseptically from the wells with no color change and plated onto MHA plate and incubated at 35°C for 20-24 h. All experiments were separately performed in triplicate and calculated as mode, median, and 90th percentile. Median MIC value (MIC50) represented the MIC value of one-half of the tested population. The 90th percentile (MIC90) represented the MIC value of 90% of the tested population [19]. Likewise, MBC50 and MBC90 were the MBC values at which 50% or 90% of isolates in a tested population were killed, respectively.
Statistical Analysis
In this study, the inhibition zone of each volatile oil was compared with tea tree oil and statistically analyzed using independent Student’s t-test (SPSS version 22). The MIC and MBC values in each of the tested volatile oils and tea tree oil were statistically analyzed by Mann–Whitney U-test (SPSS version 22).
RESULTS
The percent yields of the water-distilled volatile oils were calculated. The yields ranged from 0.1% to 4.3% w/w – ginger (0.1), lemongrass (0.2), tree basil (0.2), galangal (0.3), sweet basil (0.3), cinnamon (0.9), lime (1.0), plai (1.1), kaffir lime (2.1), and clove (4.3). A disk diffusion method was performed to preliminarily evaluate the antibacterial activity of the volatile oils against four reference bacterial strains (S. aureus, E. coli, P. aeruginosa, and A. baumannii). Except P. aeruginosa, the positive control tea tree oil represents antibacterial activity to the bacteria tested. No inhibition zone was observed in volatile dissolving buffer. The difference in the inhibition zones between tea tree oil and each volatile oil was analyzed using independent Student’s t-test. The results indicated that cinnamon oil exhibited a high potency of antibacterial activity against all bacterial strains tested (P < 0.01). Sweet basil and lemon grass were highly active against S. aureus and E. coli; however, these volatile oils showed no significant activity when tested with both non-fermentative Gram-negative bacilli, A. baumannii, and P. aeruginosa. The volatile oils of clove, tree basil, lime, and ginger were moderately active against some bacterial strains (P < 0.05). The antibacterial activity of plai and kaffir lime was rather inactive compared to tea tree oil. The inhibition zones of various volatile oils against S. aureus, E. coli, P. aeruginosa, and A. baumannii standard strains were shown in Figures 1-4, respectively. Many volatile oils showed an inhibitory effect against MDR-A. baumannii including tea tree oil [Figure 5]. However, the mean of the inhibition zones of the cinnamon and clove oils was significantly higher than tea tree oil (P < 0.01). Both standard strains of A. baumannii ATCC 19606 and MDR-A. baumannii isolates were determined for MIC and MBC by broth microdilution method. The MIC and MBC of the positive control tea tree oil against A. baumannii ATCC 19606 were 2 and 4 mg/mL, respectively. Cinnamon oil was highly active, with MIC and MBC values of 0.25 mg/mL. The MICs and MBCs of the volatile oils tested against A. baumannii ATCC 19606 were shown in Table 2. The MICs and MBCs of each volatile oil tested against MDR-A. baumannii isolates were statistically analyzed using Mann–Whitney U-test. The modes were equivalent to the medians. The tea tree oil exhibited anti-MDR-A. baumannii activity with MIC90 and MBC90 of 2 and 4 mg/mL, respectively. The mean MICs of four volatile oils, cinnamon, clove, tree basil, and kaffir lime were significantly lower than the positive control tea tree oil with the MIC90 of 0.25, 0.5, 1, and 1 mg/mL, respectively (P < 0.05). The MIC and MBC of the volatile oils against 30 clinical strains of MDR-A. baumanni were shown in Table 3.
Figure 1.
Inhibition zones of 11 volatile oils against Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 25923. *Indicated a significant difference at P < 0.05, and ** indicated a highly significant difference at P < 0.01
Figure 2.
Inhibition zones of 11 volatile oils against Escherichia coli ATCC 25922. **Indicated a highly significant difference at P < 0.01
Figure 3.
Inhibition zones of 11 volatile oils against Pseudomonas aeruginosa ATCC 27853. **Indicated a highly significant difference at P < 0.01
Figure 4.
Inhibition zones of 11 volatile oils against Acinetobacter baumannii ATCC 19606. *Indicated a significant difference at P < 0.05, and **Indicated a highly significant difference at P < 0.01
Figure 5.
Average inhibition zone in diameter obtained from various volatile oils against 30 multidrug-resistant - Acinetobacter baumannii isolates. **Indicated a highly significant difference at P < 0.01
Table 2.
MICs and MBCs of volatile oils against standard strain A. baumannii ATCC 19606
Table 3.
The MICs and MBCs of volatile oils against MDR-A. baumannii
DISCUSSION
The most problematic of A. baumannii infections nowadays are the MDR and it becomes a serious issue, in which most antibiotics drug therapy are unable to cure the diseases. Finding new and effective antibacterial compounds against MDR-A. baumannii is urgent; volatile oils are one such compound worth screening. In this study, 10 volatile oils were determined for antibacterial activity against S. aureus, E. coli, P. aeruginosa, A. baumannii, and 30 isolates of MDR-A. baumannii. The antimicrobial activity of tea tree oil against aerobic bacteria has previously been published; the compounds involved in its antibacterial activity such as terpinen-4-ol, a-terpinene and g-terpinene have been characterized [20]. Similarly to Carson and Riley’s study, an inactive effect of tea tree oil against P. aeruginosa was observed in this study [20]. A. baumannii ATCC 19606 and MDR-A. baumannii isolates could be inhibited by tea tree oil with MIC90 and MBC90 concentrations of 2 and 4 mg/mL, respectively.
The extracted volatile oils were preliminarily screened for antibacterial activity by disc diffusion method. Among the medicinal plants tested, cinnamon oil exerted the highest activity to inhibit the growth of all bacteria while sweet basil and lemon grass strongly inhibited in some bacteria. Standard broth microdilution method was performed and revealed that the volatile oils of cinnamon, clove, tree basil, and kaffir lime showed strong antibacterial activity against MDR-A. baumannii isolates. The antimicrobial activity of cinnamon oil against S. aureus, E. coli, Acinetobacter lwoffii, and P. aeruginosa has previously been demonstrated [21]. Recently, Rath and Padhy indicated that the MIC and MBC of methanolic extract of both clove and cinnamon against MDR-A. baumannii were 1.51 and 3.41 mg/mL, respectively [22]. The inhibition zones of tree basil and tea tree oil were indifferent; the major constituents of tree basil volatile oil have previously been identified including thymol, g-terpinene, eugenol, and r-cymene [23]. The mode of antibacterial action of thymol still unknown but it has been proposed to involve in outer and inner membrane disruption [24]. Cinnamon oil possessed the highest inhibition effect against all bacterial strains and MDR-A. baumannii isolates. Gas chromatography–mass spectrometry analysis was performed in this study to identify the active ingredients with antimicrobial activity. Thirteen peaks were observed and interpreted based on specific retention time compared to a reference database. The major ingredients in cinnamon oil were cinnamaldehyde (75.89%), trans-cinnamyl acetate (7.07%), hydrocinnamaldehyde (2.39%), and 1,8-cineole (2.17%) (data not shown). Cinnamaldehyde has previously been reported to inhibit in both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria [25,26]. Noteworthy, aldehyde groups might be associated with the antimicrobial activity of cinnamon oil since these chemicals have an ability to covalently cross-link with the amine groups of DNA and proteins and interfere their functions in the cells. Although the mode of action of cinnamaldehyde is inconclusive [24], Gill and Holley demonstrated that cinnamaldehyde at a concentration of 30 mM could kill L. monocytogenese through its effect on the energy generation and membrane permeability of the bacteria [27,28]. In addition, the interaction of cinnamaldehyde with essential enzymes and bacterial cell wall damage at high concentration has been investigated [29]. Although cinnamaldehyde possesses potent antimicrobial activity against MDR pathogen, its cellular and in vivo cytotoxicity have been reported [30,31]. In addition, it has been reviewed to be a cause of allergic reaction in toothpaste [32]. Consequently, a dosage level at which no adverse effects is indispensable determined before use in the future application.
CONCLUSIONS
Our study indicated the antibacterial activity of volatile oils extracted from herbs against several bacteria, including MDR-A. baumannii. These plant extracts would be promising antimicrobial agents for further treating of human pathogens, including drug-resistant bacteria.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This research was financially supported by the Faculty of Medicine Research Fund, Chiang Mai University, Thailand. The authors thank the staff of the Diagnostic Laboratory, Maharaj Nakorn Chiang Mai Hospital for helpful collection of the clinical specimens.
Footnotes
Source of Support: Nil
Conflict of Interest: None declared.
REFERENCES
- 1.World Health Organization (WHO) Global priority list of antibiotic-resistant bacteria to guide research, discovery, and development of new antibiotics. Geneva: Swiss; 2017. [[Last accessed on 2017 Feb 25]]. Available from: http://www.who.int/medicines/publications/WHO-PPL-Short_Summary_251Feb-ET_NM_WHO.pdf . [Google Scholar]
- 2.Jawad A, Seifert H, Snelling AM, Heritage J, Hawkey PM. Survival of Acinetobacter baumannii on dry surfaces: Comparison of outbreak and sporadic isolates. J Clin Microbiol. 1998;36:1938–41. doi: 10.1128/jcm.36.7.1938-1941.1998. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.McConnell MJ, Actis L, Pachón J. Acinetobacter baumannii: Human infections, factors contributing to pathogenesis and animal models. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2013;37:130–55. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6976.2012.00344.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Ahmed SS, Alp E, Hopman J, Voss A. Global epidemiology on colistin resistant Acinetobacter baumannii. J Infect Dis Ther. 2016;4:1000287. [Google Scholar]
- 5.De Francesco MA, Ravizzola G, Peroni L, Bonfani C, Manca N. Prevalence of multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii and Pseudomnas aeruginosa in an Italian hospital. J Infect Public Health. 2013;6:179–85. doi: 10.1016/j.jiph.2012.11.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Sukanya S, Lakshmi V, Padmaja K. Prevalence of multidrug resistant Acinetobacter baumannii in clinical samples in a tertiary care hospital. Int J Infect Control. 2014;11:3. [Google Scholar]
- 7.Tunyapanit W, Pruekprasert P, Laoprasopwattana K, Chelae S. Antimicrobial susceptibility of Acinetobacter baumannii isolated from hospital patients. Sci Asia. 2014;40:28–34. [Google Scholar]
- 8.May J, Chan CH, King A, Williams L, French GL. Time-kill studies of tea tree oils on clinical isolates. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2000;45:639–43. doi: 10.1093/jac/45.5.639. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Rivas da Silva AC, Lopes PM, Barros de Azevedo MM, Costa DC, Alviano CS, Alviano DS. Biological activities of alpha-pinene and b-pinene enantiomers. Molecules. 2012;17:6305–16. doi: 10.3390/molecules17066305. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Constantiniu S, Romaniuc A, Iancu LS, Filimon R, Tarasi I. Culture and biochemical characteristics of Acinetobacter spp. Strains isolated from hospital units. J Prev Med. 2004;12:35–42. [Google Scholar]
- 11.Wilson KH, Blitchington RB, Greene RC. Amplification of bacterial 16S ribosomal DNA with polymerase chain reaction. J Clin Microbiol. 1990;28:1942–6. doi: 10.1128/jcm.28.9.1942-1946.1990. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.CLSI. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Disk Susceptibility Tests;Approved Standard, M02-A11. 11th ed. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2012. [Google Scholar]
- 13.CLSI. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing;Twenty- Second Informational Supplement, M100-S22. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2012. [Google Scholar]
- 14.Magiorakos AP, Srinivasan A, Carey RB, Carmeli Y, Falagas ME, Giske CG, et al. Multidrug-resistant, extensively drug-resistant and pandrug-resistant bacteria: An international expert proposal for interim standard definitions for acquired resistance. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2012;18:268–81. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2011.03570.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Kokoska L, Havlik J, Valterova I, Sovova H, Sajfrtova M, Jankovska I. Comparison of chemical composition and antibacterial activity of Nigella sativa seed essential oils obtained by different extraction methods. J Food Prot. 2008;71:2475–80. doi: 10.4315/0362-028x-71.12.2475. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Prabuseenivasan S, Jayakumar M, Ignacimuthu S. In vitro antibacterial activity of some plant essential oils. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2006;6:39. doi: 10.1186/1472-6882-6-39. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.CLSI. Methods for Dilution Antimicrobial Susceptibility Tests for Bacteria that Grow Aerobically; Approved Standard, M07-A9. 9th ed. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2012. [Google Scholar]
- 18.Carson CF, Riley TV. Antimicrobial activity of the major components of the essential oil of Melaleuca alternifolia. JAppl Bacteriol. 1995;78:264–9. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.1995.tb05025.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Schwarz S, Silley P, Simjee S, Woodford N, van Duijkeren E, Johnson AP, et al. Editorial: Assessing the antimicrobial susceptibility of bacteria obtained from animals. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2010;65:601–4. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkq037. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Carson CF, Riley TV. The antimicrobial activity of tea tree oil. Med J Aust. 1994;160:236. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Unlu M, Ergene E, Unlu GV, Zeytinoglu HS, Vural N. Composition, antimicrobial activity and in vitro cytotoxicity of essential oil from Cinnamomum zeylanicum Blume (Lauraceae) Food Chem Toxicol. 2010;48:3274–80. doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2010.09.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Rath S, Padhy RN. Monitoring in vitro antibacterial efficacy of 26 Indian spices against multidrug resistant urinary tract infecting bacteria. Integr Med Res. 2014;3:133–41. doi: 10.1016/j.imr.2014.04.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Kpadonou Kpoviessi BG, Ladekan EY, Kpoviessi DS, Gbaguidi F, Yehouenou B, Quetin-Leclercq J, et al. Chemical variation of essential oil constituents of Ocimum gratissimum L. from Benin, and impact on antimicrobial properties and toxicity against Artemia salina leach. Chem Biodivers. 2012;9:139–50. doi: 10.1002/cbdv.201100194. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Hyldgaard M, Mygind T, Meyer RL. Essential oils in food preservation: Mode of action, synergies, and interactions with food matrix components. Front Microbiol. 2012;3:12. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2012.00012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Helander IM, Alakomi HL, Latva-Kala K, Mattila-Sandholm T, Pol L, Smid EJ, et al. Characterization of the action of selected essential oil components on gram-negative bacteria. J Agric Food Chem. 1998;46:3590–5. [Google Scholar]
- 26.Bowles BL, Sackitey SK, Williams AC. Inhibitory effects of flavor compounds on Staphylococcus aureus WRRC B124. J Food Saf. 1995;15:337–47. [Google Scholar]
- 27.Gill AO, Holley RA. Mechanisms of bactericidal action of cinnamaldehyde against Listeria monocytogenes and of eugenol against L. Monocytogenes and Lactobacillus sakei. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2004;70:5750–5. doi: 10.1128/AEM.70.10.5750-5755.2004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Gill AO, Holley RA. Inhibition of membrane bound ATPases of Escherichia coli and Listeria monocytogenes by plant oil aromatics. Int J Food Microbiol. 2006;111:170–4. doi: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2006.04.046. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Di Pasqua R, Betts G, Hoskins N, Edwards M, Ercolini D, Mauriello G. Membrane toxicity of antimicrobial compounds from essential oils. J Agric Food Chem. 2007;55:4863–70. doi: 10.1021/jf0636465. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Zhang JH, Liu LQ, He YL, Kong WJ, Huang SA. Cytotoxic effect of trans-cinnamaldehyde on human leukemia K562 cells. Acta Pharmacol Sin. 2010;31:861–6. doi: 10.1038/aps.2010.76. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Atalla SS, El-Makawy A. Could cinnamaldehyde be harmful?Histological, cytological and biochemical studies on its effect on some organs of mice. Egypt J Histol. 2007;30:447–64. [Google Scholar]
- 32.Drake TE, Maibach HI. Allergic contact dermatitis and stomatitis caused by a cinnamic aldehyde-flavored toothpaste. Arch Dermatol. 1976;112:202–3. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]