4.6 Article

Chemical Composition and Antimicrobial Effectiveness of Ocimum gratissimum L. Essential Oil Against Multidrug-Resistant Isolates of Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli

期刊

MOLECULES
卷 24, 期 21, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/molecules24213864

关键词

antimicrobial activity; multiresistant microorganisms; ciprofloxacin; oxacillin; MDR bacteria; antibiofilm activity

资金

  1. Foundation for Support for Research and Scientific and Technological Development of Maranhao, (FAPEMA-Brazil) [00986/17]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study investigated the antimicrobial activity of the essential oil extract of Ocimum gratissimum L. (EOOG) against multiresistant microorganisms in planktonic and biofilm form. Hydrodistillation was used to obtain the EOOG, and the analysis of chemical composition was done by gas chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry (GC/MS) and flame ionization detection (GC/FID). EOOG biological activity was verified against isolates of Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli, using four strains for each species. The antibacterial action of EOOG was determined by disk diffusion, microdilution (MIC/MBC), growth curve under sub-MIC exposure, and the combinatorial activity with ciprofloxacin (CIP) and oxacillin (OXA) were determined by checkerboard assay. The EOOG antibiofilm action was performed against the established biofilm and analyzed by crystal violet, colony-forming unit count, and SEM analyses. EOOG yielded 1.66% w/w, with eugenol as the major component (74.83%). The MIC was 1000 mu g/mL for the most tested strains. The growth curve showed a lag phase delay for both species, mainly S. aureus, and reduced the growth level of E. coli by half. The combination of EOOG with OXA and CIP led to an additive action for S. aureus. A significant reduction in biofilm biomass and cell viability was verified for S. aureus and E. coli. In conclusion, EOOG has relevant potential as a natural alternative to treat infections caused by multiresistant strains.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据