4.5 Review

The potential of South African medicinal plants against microbial biofilm and quorum sensing of foodborne pathogens: A review

期刊

SOUTH AFRICAN JOURNAL OF BOTANY
卷 126, 期 -, 页码 214-231

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.sajb.2019.07.024

关键词

Foodborne pathogens; Medicinal plants; Microbial biofilm; Quorum sensing; South Africa

资金

  1. National Research Foundation, South Africa [105993]
  2. University of Pretoria
  3. University of Benin

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Microbial biofilm and quorum sensing are two intertwined traits that have been used by microorganisms for their survival and improved virulence. They have been implicated as the cause of severe infections in humans as their incidence makes it difficult to treat common infections and the possibility of recurrent infections is high. Microbial biofilm and quorum sensing have also been increasingly implicated in the food processing and the medical industry where they have caused food and surface contamination. As a result of emerging resistance, conventional control methods are fast becoming ineffective. In this review, we highlight the potential of South African plants as sources of antibiofilm and quorum quenching bioactive secondary metabolites. The review emphasizes antimicrobial studies of medicinal plants with regard to foodborne pathogens and the relevant public health importance. Also discussed is the role of quorum sensing and biofilm formation in antimicrobial resistance. A total of 46 plant species belonging to 27 families and 31 isolated bioactive compounds were documented to have antibiofilm and quorum quenching capacity against foodborne pathogens. This review seeks to summarize present knowledge on South African medicinal plants with antibiofilm and quorum quenching potential. It also provides support for continuing investigations on South African medicinal plants with previously reported good to excellent antimicrobial activities. (C) 2019 SAAB. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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