4.6 Article

Mechanisms of bactericidal action of cinnamaldehyde against Listeria monocytogenes and of eugenol against L-monocytogenes and Lactobacillus sakei

期刊

APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 70, 期 10, 页码 5750-5755

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AEM.70.10.5750-5755.2004

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The spice oil components eugenol and cinnamaldehyde possess activity against both gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria, but the mechanisms of action remain obscure. In broth media at 20degreesC, 5 mM eugenol or 30 mM cinnamaldehyde was bactericidal (>1-log reduction in the number of CFU per milliliter in I h) to Listeria monocytogenes. At a concentration of 6 mM eugenol was bactericidal to Lactobacillus sakei, but treatment with 0.5 M cinnamaldehyde had no significant effect. To investigate the role of interference with energy generation in the mechanism of action, the cellular and extracellular ATP levels of cells in HEPES buffer at 20degreesC were measured. Treatment of nonenergized L. monocytogenes with 5 mM eugenol, 40 mM cinnamaldehyde, or 10 muM carbonyl cyanide m-chlorophenylhydrazone (CCCP) for 5 min prevented an increase in the cellular ATP concentration upon addition of glucose. Treatment of energized L. monocytogenes with 40 mM cinnamaldehyde or 10 muM CCCP caused a rapid decline in cellular ATP levels, but 5 mM eugenol had no effect on cellular ATP. Treatment of L. sakei with 10 mM eugenol prevented ATP generation by nonenergized cells and had no effect on the cellular ATP of energized cells. CCCP at a concentration of 100 muM had no significant effect on the cellular ATP of L. sakei. No significant changes in extracellular ATP were observed. Due to their rapidity, effects on energy generation clearly play a major role in the activity of eugenol and cinnamaldehyde at bactericidal concentrations. The possible mechanisms of inhibition of energy generation are inhibition of glucose uptake or utilization of glucose and effects on membrane permeability.

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