Original Article Antibacterial activity of resin rich plant extracts Mohd Shuaib, Abuzer Ali1, Mohd Ali1, Bibhu Prasad Panda1, Mohd Imtiyaz Ahmad2
Department of Pharmacy, Kalka Institute for Research and Advanced Studies, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh, 1 Departments of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy, Jamia Hamdard, New Delhi, 2 Department of Pharmacy, Azad Institute of Pharmacy and Research, Azadpur, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India
ABSTRACT Background: The in vitro antibacterial activity of resin rich methanolic extracts (RRMEs) of Commiphora myrrha, Operculina turpethum, and Pinus roxburghii. Materials and Methods: Different concentration were studied by agar‑well diffusion method against Gram‑positive (Staphylococcus aureus, Bacillus subtilis, Micrococcus luteus, Enterococcus faecalis) and Gram‑negative bacterial strains (Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Salmonella typhi, Shigella dysenteriae). Results: Among all the bacterial strains tested, E. faecalis was most sensitive and S. typhi was resistant to C. myrrha and P. roxburghii. The extracts of O. turpethum were active against all tested strains in which B. subtilis and S. aureus were the most sensitive. Conclusion: This suggested that the antibacterial activity of RRMEs of O. turpethum was more than C. myrrha and P. roxburghii. This probably explains the potential of these plants against a number of infections caused by bacterial strains tested.
Address for correspondence: Dr. Mohd Shuaib, E‑mail: shuaib916@yahoo. com Received : 29‑09‑12 Review completed : 21‑02‑13 Accepted : 19‑04‑13
KEY WORDS: Antibacterial drugs, Commiphora myrrha, glycosidic resins, oleo‑gum‑resins, oleo‑resins, Operculina turpethum, Pinus roxburghii
F
inding healing powers in plants is an ancient idea. It is estimated that there are 250,000‑500,000 species of plants on the earth. A relatively low percentage of these are used as foods by both human and other animal species.[1] Plants and plant products have been in existence for 1000s of years almost from the beginning of human civilization and continue to provide mankind with the new remedies. Medicinal plants have importance as well as great economic status around the globe. Multiple drug resistance has occurred consequently due
Access this article online Quick Response Code:
Website: www.jpbsonline.org DOI: 10.4103/0975-7406.120073
to inappropriate use of commercially available antibacterial drugs that lead to repeated use of antibiotics and insufficient control of the disease.[2] At the same time, patients come across unavoidable antibiotic associated adverse effects. This leads to the development of alternative medicines from plants for the prevention and treatment of bacterial infections.[3‑6] Phytoconstituents showed enormous therapeutic potentials and minimal or lower side‑effects as compared to synthesized drugs. Phytoconstituents such as alkaloids, tannins, polyphenols, quinines, flavonoids, coumarins, terpenoids, lectins, and polypeptides are responsible for activity concern.[7,8] Plants showed their useful properties such as anticancer, anti‑tumor, anti‑mutagenic, antioxidant, hepato‑protective, antiviral, antimalarial, anti‑dysenteric, antiseptic, anti‑stress, immunotherapeutic, antibacterial, antifungal, and several more pharmacological actions.[9] Natural resins are known for their antiseptic and antibacterial effects since from ancient history of human civilization. However, fewer reports are available regarding resins and resin containing plants for antibacterial
How to cite this article: Shuaib M, Ali A, Ali M, Panda BP, Ahmad MI. Antibacterial activity of resin rich plant extracts. J Pharm Bioall Sci 2013;5:265-9.
Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences October-December 2013 Vol 5 Issue 4
265
Shuaib, et al.: Antibacterial activity of resin
activity. Resins are complex mixtures of resin acids, resin alcohols, resin phenols, and their esters. Resins associated with volatile oils are oleoresins, with gums are gum‑resins or with oil and gum are oleo‑gum‑resins. These products are usually contained in schizogenous or schizolysigenous ducts or cavities.[10,11] Commiphora myrrha has many medicinal powers and has been used to treat various diseases, such as fever, ache, amenorrhea, tumors, stomach complaints, chest ailments, and skin infections in ancient India, China, and Greece.[12,13] The characteristic constituents of oleo‑gum‑resins of C. myrrha are furanosesquiterpenes such as furanoelemanes, furanoeudesmanes, and furanogermacranes.[14,15] The crude extracts and some constituents of the C. myrrha exhibited diverse biological activities, such as cytotoxic, anaesthetic, anti‑inflammatory, antioxidant, and antimicrobial effects.[16‑19] In Indian traditional system of medicine, Operculina turpethum is used internally to treat fevers, edema, anemia, constipation, hepatitis, ulcers, skin disorders, obesity, hemorrhoids, cough, asthma, paralysis, gout, and rheumatism.[20‑22] It is proved to have anti‑secretory and ulcer protective, anti‑inflammatory,[23] hepatoprotective, [24] anti‑microbial, [25] anticancer, and antioxidant activities.[26] Glycosidic resins of O. turpethum constitutes terpethin, α‑terpethein and β‑terpethein, turpethic acids A‑C, and two intact resin glycosides, turpethosides A and B, jalapinolic acid, and operculinolic acid.[27,28] Pinus roxburghii oleo‑resin mainly consists of α and β‑pinene, Δ‑3‑carene, longifolene, abietic acid and isopimaric acid and have been used as antiseptic, expectorant, carminative, antioxidant, anthelmintic, and analgesic. [29,30] The main objective of the work was to screen and evaluate antibacterial activity of methanolic extracts of C. myrrha (oleo‑gum‑resin), O. turpethum (glycosidic resin), P. roxburghii (oleo‑resin) against both multidrug resistance Gram‑positive as well as Gram‑negative bacteria.
Materials and Methods Plant materials The C. myrrha (oleo‑gum‑resin), O. turpethum (glycosidic resin) and P. roxburghii (oleo‑resin) were procured from local market of Delhi and identified by Dr. H.B. Singh, Scientist F and Head, Raw Materials Herbarium, and Museum, National Institute of Science Communication and Information Resources (NISCAIR), New Delhi. Voucher specimens (Nos. N/R/C/06‑07/803/120; National Research Council (NRC)/‑2007/08/842/26; N/R/ C/‑R007/08/851/35) were deposited in the NISCAIR, New Delhi.
Preparation of methanolic extracts The dried material of C. myrrha, O. turpethum and P. roxburghii were cleaned, and grounded into a coarse powder by a Multi‑Mill and passed through a sieve (20 mesh). Dried plant samples were further air‑dried in a ventilated oven at 45°C for 24 h, then grounded into a coarse powder and passed through a sieve as above. Each Powdered sample (100 g) was extracted separately with methanol (500 ml) for 12 h using Soxhlet apparatus. The methanolic extracts were filtered by a Millipore filter with a
266
0.45 μm nylon membrane under vacuum. The filtrates were concentrated under reduced pressure and freeze dried. The yield of methanolic extract of C. myrrha, O. turpethum and P. roxburghii was 7.4 g, 8.33 g and 93 g, respectively. The samples were stored at 4°C until use.
Microbial cultures and growth conditions Cultures of the Gram‑positive and Gram‑negative bacteria were kindly provided by ITL LABS Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi. Gram‑positive bacteria were Staphylococcus aureus (American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) 6538), Bacillus subtilis (ATCC 6633), Micrococcus luteus (MTCC 2470), Enterococcus faecalis (Microbial Type Culture Collection (ATCC) 439). Gram‑negative bacteria were Escherichia coli (MTCC 452), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (ATCC 25619), Salmonella typhi (ATCC 786), Shigella dysenteriae (MTCC 1457). Cultures of bacteria were grown on a nutrient broth at 37°C for 12 h and were maintained on respective agar slants at 4°C.
Antimicrobial assay by agar diffusion method Antimicrobial activity of resin rich methanolic extracts (RRMEs) was evaluated by agar diffusion method.[31] The freeze dried RRMEs of tested plants in concentration 100, 250, 500, and 1000 μg/ml were prepared in phosphate buffered saline (Phosphate Buffer Solution, pH 7.0) and sterilized by filtration through 0.22 μm sterilizing Millipore express filter. All bacteria were suspended in sterile water and diluted to ~106 Colony Forming Unit (CFU)/ml. The suspension (100 μl) was spread onto the surface of plate count agar medium. Wells (4.6 mm in diameter) were cut from the agar with a sterile borer and extract solutions (60 μl) were delivered into them. Negative controls were prepared using PBS solution. Tetracycline (30 μg/well) and streptomycin (30 μg/well) were used as a positive reference standards to determine the sensitivity of Gram‑positive and Gram‑negative bacterial species tested, respectively. The inoculated plates were incubated at 35°C for 24 h. Antibacterial activity was evaluated by measuring the diameter of inhibition zone of the tested bacteria, which was expressed in millimeters.
Results and Discussion The RRMEs of C. myrrha, O. turpethum and P. roxburghii were tested in different concentration for antibacterial effect against Gram‑positive (S. aureus, B. subtilis, M. luteus, E. faecalis) and Gram‑negative bacterial strains (E. coli, P. aeruginosa, S. typhi, S. dysenteriae). When tested by agar diffusion method the results obtained in the study showed that the RRMEs of C. myrrha showed significant activity against all Gram‑positive bacterial strains while variable effects against Gram‑negative bacterial strains [Table 1 and Figure 1]. The RRMEs of C. myrrha (100 μg/ml) exhibited maximum inhibition against P. aeruginosa that measured and inactive against E. coli and S. typhi. RRMEs of C. myrrha (250 μg/ml) showed maximum zone of inhibition against E. faecalis (12.9 mm) while inactive against S. typhi. Higher concentration of RRMEs of C. myrrha 500 μg/ml and 1000 μg/ml observed maximum Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences October-December 2013 Vol 5 Issue 4
Shuaib, et al.: Antibacterial activity of resin
Table 1: Antibacterial activity of RRMEs of Commiphora myrrha against Gram‑positive and Gram‑negative bacteria Sample code
A B C D Bl S S
Sample conc. (µg/ml)
1000 500 250 100 Control Tetracycline (30 mg/ml) Streptomycin (30 mg/ml)
Zone of inhibition (mm) Gram‑positive bacteria
Gram‑negative bacteria
Staphylococcus aureus
Bacillus subtilis
Micrococcus luteus
Enterococcus faecalis
Escherichia coli
Pseudomonas aeruginosa
Salmonella typhi
Shigella dysenteriae
14.5 12.2 10.3 8.1 ‑ 13.4
14.8 12.4 11.5 6.4 ‑ 14.5
13.3 13.3 10.1 7.4 ‑ 14.9
17.5 15.3 12.9 8.8 ‑ 13.5
13.5 7.2 6.6 ‑ ‑ ‑
14.3 13.6 12.5 11.4 ‑ ‑
8.1 4.6 ‑ ‑
12.8 12.1 10.9 5.4 ‑ ‑
‑
‑
‑
‑
13.8
14.0
13.3
13.8
RRMEs: Resin rich methanolic extracts
Table 2: Antibacterial activity of RRMEs of Operculina turpethum against Gram‑positive and Gram‑negative bacteria Sample code
A B C D Bl S S
Sample conc. (µg/ml)
1000 500 250 100 Control Tetracycline (30 mg/ml) Streptomycin (30 mg/ml)
Zone of inhibition (mm) Gram‑positive bacteria
Gram‑negative bacteria
Staphylococcus aureus
Bacillus subtilis
Micrococcus luteus
Enterococcus faecalis
Escherichia coli
Pseudomonas aeruginosa
Salmonella typhi
Shigella dysenteriae
17.4 15.5 11.7 9.8 ‑ 13.0
18.4 17.1 15.8 12.3 ‑ 15.1
12.7 10.8 7.8 7.2 ‑ 14.6
15.6 13.8 12.9 8.8 ‑ 13.7
14.5 14.1 13.2 6.4 ‑ ‑
17.6 16.8 15.9 11.5 ‑ ‑
14.8 13.8 12.8 8.9 ‑ ‑
14.8 12.7 12.7 6.0 ‑ ‑
‑
‑
‑
‑
15.3
12.7
14.6
14.7
RRMEs: Resin rich methanolic extracts
Table 3: Antibacterial activity of RRMEs of Pinus roxburghii against Gram‑positive and Gram‑negative bacteria Sample code
A B C D Bl S S
Sample conc. (µg/ml)
1000 500 250 100 Control Tetracycline (30 mg/ml) Streptomycin (30 mg/ml)
Zone of inhibition (mm) Gram‑positive bacteria
Gram‑negative bacteria
Staphylococcus aureus
Bacillus subtilis
Micrococcus luteus
Enterococcus faecalis
Escherichia coli
Pseudomonas aeruginosa
Salmonella typhi
Shigella dysenteriae
16.6 13.0 12.3 7.4 ‑ 13.9
14.0 13.1 9.3 6.5 ‑ 15.7
15.5 12.9 12.1 8.2 ‑ 13.2
18.4 15.6 12.3 10.4 ‑ 13.4
13.0 9.9 5.6 ‑ ‑ ‑
9.9 5.8 4.3 ‑ ‑ ‑
6.8 3.5 2.2 ‑ ‑ ‑
14.0 13.3 9.1 7.0 ‑ ‑
‑
‑
‑
‑
13.6
13.6
13.1
14.2
RRMEs: Resin rich methanolic extracts
activity against E. faecalis, which were 15.3 and 17.5 mm, respectively and minimum against S. typhi, which were 4.6 and 8.1 mm, respectively. The RRMEs of O. turpethum showed significant activity against all strains of both Gram‑positive and Gram‑negative bacteria at different concentrations [Table 2 and Figure 2]. The RRMEs of O. turpethum (100 μg/ml) observed maximum activity against B. subtilis (12.3 mm) and minimum against S. dysenteriae (6.0 mm). The RRMEs of O. turpethum (250 μg/ml) exhibited maximum activity against P. aeruginosa (15.9 mm) and B. subtilis (15.8 mm) while the minimum against M. luteus measured 7.8 mm. On increasing the concentration the RRMEs of O. turpethum 500 Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences October-December 2013 Vol 5 Issue 4
μg/ml and 1000 μg/ml showed the highest zone of inhibition toward B. subtilis (17.1 mm) and (18.4 mm), respectively and minimum against M. luteus (10.8 mm) and E. coli (14.5 mm), respectively when compared to other tested bacterial strains. The RRMEs of P. roxburghii exhibited better activity against Gram‑positive bacteria than Gram‑negative bacterial strains in a concentration dependent manner [Table 3 and Figure 3]. The RRMEs of P. roxburghii (100 μg/ml) did not exhibited inhibition against E. coli, P. aeruginosa and S. typhi, while in concentration (250 μg/ml) showed significant inhibition in S. aureus (12.3 mm), M. luteus (12.1 mm) and E. faecalis (12.3 mm) on comparison with standard. The RRMEs 267
Shuaib, et al.: Antibacterial activity of resin
Figure 1: Zones of inhibition produced by resin rich methanolic extracts of Commiphora myrrha at the tested concentrations (Bl = control; S = standard; A = 1000 μg/ml; B = 500 μg/ml; C = 250 μg/ml; 100 μg/ml)
toward plant extracts may be due to its cell wall structure and outer membrane.[32] Gram‑negative bacteria have an outer membrane and a unique periplasmic space, which is absent in Gram‑positive bacteria.[33,34] In Gram‑negative bacteria, the hydrophilic surface of outer membrane, which is rich in lipopolysaccharide molecules, providing a barrier against various antibiotics and is also associated with the enzymes that present in the periplasmic space capable of breaking down the molecules introduced from outside.[35‑37] Gram‑positive bacteria do not have such a protective outer membrane and cell wall configuration. Antibacterial substances cause destruction of the cytoplasmic membrane that result in a leakage of the cytoplasm and its coagulation.[31,38] This study suggested that the RRMEs of C. myrrha and P. roxburghii were more potent against Gram‑positive than Gram‑negative bacterial strains while RRMEs of O. turpethum were active against all tested microbial strains. The antibacterial activity of RRMEs of O. turpethum against both Gram‑positive and Gram‑negative bacteria may be due to its glycosidic resins.
Conclusion
Figure 2: Zones of inhibition produced by resin rich methanolic extracts of Operculina turpethum at the tested concentrations (Bl = control; S = standard; A = 1000 μg/ml; B = 500 μg/ml; C = 250 μg/ml; 100 μg/ml)
Our results allow us to conclude that the RRMEs of C. myrrha, O. turpethum and P. roxburghii exhibited some degree of antimicrobial activity against Gram‑positive (S. aureus, B. subtilis, M. luteus, E. faecalis) and Gram‑negative bacterial strains (E. coli, P. aeruginosa, S. typhi, S. dysenteriae). This probably explains the use of these plants by the indigenous people against a number of infections since generations. The comparable activity of RRMEs to some antibiotics may help to discover new chemical classes of antimicrobials that may be used for the topical treatment of disorders resulted from tested microbial strains. Further research should be highlighted on exploring the phytochemicals and medicinal worth of above tested plants.
Acknowledgments The authors are thankful to the ITL LABS Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi for providing the cultures of Gram‑positive and Gram‑negative bacterial strains. The authors are also thankful to the Department of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy, Jamia Hamdard, New Delhi for technical support. Figure 3: Zones of inhibition produced by resin rich methanolic extracts of Pinus roxburghii at the tested concentrations (Bl = control; S = standard; A = 1000 μg/ml; B = 500 μg/ml; C = 250 μg/ml; 100 μg/ml)
References 1. 2.
of P. roxburghii 500 μg/ml and 1000 μg/ml exhibited maximum inhibition against E. faecalis (15.6 mm) and (18.4 mm) respectively while the minimum against S. typhi measured 3.5 mm and 6.8 mm, respectively. In the present observations, C. myrrha and P. roxburghii extracts showed maximum activity against E. faecalis while the minimum against S. typhi. The extracts of O. turpethum were active against both Gram‑positive and Gram‑negative bacteria in which B. subtilis and S. aureus were the most sensitive. The maximum sensitivity of Gram‑positive bacterial strains
268
3. 4. 5. 6.
Borris RP. Natural products research: Perspectives from a major pharmaceutical company. J Ethnopharmacol 1996;51:29‑38. National Center for Infectious Diseases (NCID). Campaign to prevent antimicrobial resistance in healthcare settings. Centre for Disease Control and Prevention. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/ drugresistance/healthcare/problem.htm. [Updated 2006 Aug 12]. Chopra I, Hodgson J, Metcalf B, Poste G. New approaches to the control of infections caused by antibiotic‑resistant bacteria. An industry perspective. JAMA 1996;275:401‑3. Baquero F. Gram‑positive resistance: Challenge for the development of new antibiotics. J Antimicrob Chemother 1997;39 Suppl A: 1‑6. Kumar VP, Chauhan NS, Padh H, Rajani M. Search for antibacterial and antifungal agents from selected Indian medicinal plants. J Ethnopharmacol 2006;107:182‑8. Joshi B, Lekhak S, Sharma A. Antibacterial property of different medicinal plants: Ocimum sanctum, Cinnamomum zeylanicum, Xanthoxylum armatum and Origanum majorana. Kathmandu Univ J
Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences October-December 2013 Vol 5 Issue 4
Shuaib, et al.: Antibacterial activity of resin
7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15.
16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23.
Sci Eng Technol 2009;5:143‑50. Cowan MM. Plant products as antimicrobial agents. Clin Microbiol Rev 1999;12:564‑82. Das K, Tiwari RK, Shrivastava DK. Techniques for evaluation of medicinal plant products as antimicrobial agent: Current methods and future trends. J Med Plants Res 2010;4:104‑11. Zahin M, Aqil F, Khan MS, Ahmad I. Ethno medicinal plants derived antibacterials and their prospects. Ethno Med Source Complement Ther 2010:149‑78. Charles Evans W. Volatile oils and resins. Trease and Evans Pharmacognosy. 15th ed. China: Harcourt Publishers; 2002. p. 253‑7. Savluchinske‑Feio S, Curto MJ, Gigante B, Roseiro JC. Antimicrobial activity of resin acid derivatives. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 2006;72:430‑6. El Ashry ES, Rashed N, Salama OM, Saleh A. Components, therapeutic value and uses of myrrh. Pharmazie 2003;58:163‑8. Shen T, Lou Hx. Chemical constituents from resin of Commiphora species and their biological activities. Nat Prod Res Dev 2008;20:360‑6. Morteza‑Semnani K, Saeedi M. Constituents of the essential oil of Commiphora myrrha (Nees) Engl. var. molmol. J Essent Oil Res 2003;15:50‑1. Marongiu B, Piras A, Porcedda S, Scorciapino A. Chemical composition of the essential oil and supercritical CO2 extract of Commiphora myrrha (Nees) Engl. and of Acorus calamus L. J Agric Food Chem 2005;53:7939‑43. Nomicos EY. Myrrh: Medical marvel or myth of the Magi? Holist Nurs Pract 2007;21:308‑23. Tipton DA, Lyle B, Babich H, Dabbous MKh. In vitro cytotoxic and anti‑inflammatory effects of myrrh oil on human gingival fibroblasts and epithelial cells. Toxicol in vitro 2003;17:301‑10. Su S, Wang T, Duan JA, Zhou W, Hua YQ, Tang YP, et al . Anti‑inflammatory and analgesic activity of different extracts of Commiphora myrrha. J Ethnopharmacol 2011;134:251‑8. Shen T, Li GH, Wang XN, Lou Hx. The genus Commiphora : A review of its traditional uses, phytochemistry and pharmacology. J Ethnopharmacol 2012;142:319‑30. Anonymous.The Ayurvedic Pharmacopoeia of India. New Delhi: Department of Indian Systems of Medicine and Homeopathy; 2001. Anonymous. The Wealth of India: Raw Materials. New Delhi: Council of Scientific and Industrial Research; 2007. Kohli KR, Nipanikar SU, Kadbhane KP. A comprehensive review on TRIVRIT Operculina turpethum syn. Ipomoea turpethum. Int J Pharma Bio Sci 2010;1:443‑52. Bhande RM, Laakshmayya, Kumar P, Mahurkar NK, Setty SR. Pharmacological screening of root of O. perculina turpethum and
Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences October-December 2013 Vol 5 Issue 4
its formulations. Acta Pharmaceutica Sciencia 2006;48:11‑7. 24. Prakash VB, Mukherjee A. Hepato‑protective effect of an ayurvedic formulation Prak‑20 in CCl4 induced toxicity in rats: Results of three studies. Int J Pharm Clin Res 2010;2:23‑7. 25. Rashid MH, Gafur MA, Sadik MG, Rahman MA. Antibacterial and cytotoxic activities of extracts and isolated compounds of Ipomoea turpethum. Pak J Biol Sci 2002;5:597‑9. 26. Anbuselvam C, Vijayavel K, Balasubramanian MP. Protective effect of Operculina turpethum against 7,12‑dimethyl benz (a) anthracene induced oxidative stress with reference to breast cancer in experimental rats. Chem Biol Interact 2007;168:229‑36. 27. Ding W, Jiang ZH, Wu P, Xu L, Wei X. Resin glycosides from the aerial parts of Operculina turpethum. Phytochemistry 2012;81:165‑74. 28. Wagner H, Wenzel G, Chari VM. The turpethinic acids of Ipomoea turpethum L. chemical constituents of the convolvulaceae resins‑III. Planta Medica 1978;33:144‑51. 29. Anonymous. The Wealth of India: Raw Materials. New Delhi: Council of Scientific and Industrial Research; 2005. 30. Coppen JJ, Robinson JM, Kaushal AN. Composition of xylem resin from Pinus wallichiana and P. roxburghii. Phytochemistry 1988;27:2873‑5. 31. Shan B, Cai YZ, Brooks JD, Corke H. The in vitro antibacterial activity of dietary spice and medicinal herb extracts. Int J Food Microbiol 2007;117:112‑9. 32. Zaika LL. Spices and herbs: Their antimicrobial activity and its determination. J Food Nutr 1988;9:97‑118. 33. Nikaido H. Outer membrane. In: Neidhardt FC, editor. Escherichia coli and Salmonella typhimurium: Cellular and Molecular Biology. Washington, D.C: American Society for Microbiology Press; 1996. p. 29‑47. 34. Duffy CF, Power RF. Antioxidant and antimicrobial properties of some Chinese plant extracts. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2001;17:527‑9. 35. Russell AD. Mechanisms of bacterial resistance to non‑antibiotics: Food additives and food and pharmaceutical preservatives. J Appl Bacteriol 1991;71:191‑201. 36. Nikaido H. Prevention of drug access to bacterial targets: Permeability barriers and active efflux. Science 1994;264:382‑8. 37. Gao Y, van Belkum MJ, Stiles ME. The outer membrane of gram‑negative bacteria inhibits antibacterial activity of brochocin‑C. Appl Environ Microbiol 1999;65:4329‑33. 38. Kalemba D, Kunicka A. Antibacterial and antifungal properties of essential oils. Curr Med Chem 2003;10:813‑29. Source of Support: Nil, Conflict of Interest: None declared.
269
Copyright of Journal of Pharmacy & Bioallied Sciences is the property of Medknow Publications & Media Pvt. Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
Department of Pharmacy, Kalka Institute for Research and Advanced Studies, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh, 1 Departments of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy, Jamia Hamdard, New Delhi, 2 Department of Pharmacy, Azad Institute of Pharmacy and Research, Azadpur, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India
ABSTRACT Background: The in vitro antibacterial activity of resin rich methanolic extracts (RRMEs) of Commiphora myrrha, Operculina turpethum, and Pinus roxburghii. Materials and Methods: Different concentration were studied by agar‑well diffusion method against Gram‑positive (Staphylococcus aureus, Bacillus subtilis, Micrococcus luteus, Enterococcus faecalis) and Gram‑negative bacterial strains (Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Salmonella typhi, Shigella dysenteriae). Results: Among all the bacterial strains tested, E. faecalis was most sensitive and S. typhi was resistant to C. myrrha and P. roxburghii. The extracts of O. turpethum were active against all tested strains in which B. subtilis and S. aureus were the most sensitive. Conclusion: This suggested that the antibacterial activity of RRMEs of O. turpethum was more than C. myrrha and P. roxburghii. This probably explains the potential of these plants against a number of infections caused by bacterial strains tested.
Address for correspondence: Dr. Mohd Shuaib, E‑mail: shuaib916@yahoo. com Received : 29‑09‑12 Review completed : 21‑02‑13 Accepted : 19‑04‑13
KEY WORDS: Antibacterial drugs, Commiphora myrrha, glycosidic resins, oleo‑gum‑resins, oleo‑resins, Operculina turpethum, Pinus roxburghii
F
inding healing powers in plants is an ancient idea. It is estimated that there are 250,000‑500,000 species of plants on the earth. A relatively low percentage of these are used as foods by both human and other animal species.[1] Plants and plant products have been in existence for 1000s of years almost from the beginning of human civilization and continue to provide mankind with the new remedies. Medicinal plants have importance as well as great economic status around the globe. Multiple drug resistance has occurred consequently due
Access this article online Quick Response Code:
Website: www.jpbsonline.org DOI: 10.4103/0975-7406.120073
to inappropriate use of commercially available antibacterial drugs that lead to repeated use of antibiotics and insufficient control of the disease.[2] At the same time, patients come across unavoidable antibiotic associated adverse effects. This leads to the development of alternative medicines from plants for the prevention and treatment of bacterial infections.[3‑6] Phytoconstituents showed enormous therapeutic potentials and minimal or lower side‑effects as compared to synthesized drugs. Phytoconstituents such as alkaloids, tannins, polyphenols, quinines, flavonoids, coumarins, terpenoids, lectins, and polypeptides are responsible for activity concern.[7,8] Plants showed their useful properties such as anticancer, anti‑tumor, anti‑mutagenic, antioxidant, hepato‑protective, antiviral, antimalarial, anti‑dysenteric, antiseptic, anti‑stress, immunotherapeutic, antibacterial, antifungal, and several more pharmacological actions.[9] Natural resins are known for their antiseptic and antibacterial effects since from ancient history of human civilization. However, fewer reports are available regarding resins and resin containing plants for antibacterial
How to cite this article: Shuaib M, Ali A, Ali M, Panda BP, Ahmad MI. Antibacterial activity of resin rich plant extracts. J Pharm Bioall Sci 2013;5:265-9.
Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences October-December 2013 Vol 5 Issue 4
265
Shuaib, et al.: Antibacterial activity of resin
activity. Resins are complex mixtures of resin acids, resin alcohols, resin phenols, and their esters. Resins associated with volatile oils are oleoresins, with gums are gum‑resins or with oil and gum are oleo‑gum‑resins. These products are usually contained in schizogenous or schizolysigenous ducts or cavities.[10,11] Commiphora myrrha has many medicinal powers and has been used to treat various diseases, such as fever, ache, amenorrhea, tumors, stomach complaints, chest ailments, and skin infections in ancient India, China, and Greece.[12,13] The characteristic constituents of oleo‑gum‑resins of C. myrrha are furanosesquiterpenes such as furanoelemanes, furanoeudesmanes, and furanogermacranes.[14,15] The crude extracts and some constituents of the C. myrrha exhibited diverse biological activities, such as cytotoxic, anaesthetic, anti‑inflammatory, antioxidant, and antimicrobial effects.[16‑19] In Indian traditional system of medicine, Operculina turpethum is used internally to treat fevers, edema, anemia, constipation, hepatitis, ulcers, skin disorders, obesity, hemorrhoids, cough, asthma, paralysis, gout, and rheumatism.[20‑22] It is proved to have anti‑secretory and ulcer protective, anti‑inflammatory,[23] hepatoprotective, [24] anti‑microbial, [25] anticancer, and antioxidant activities.[26] Glycosidic resins of O. turpethum constitutes terpethin, α‑terpethein and β‑terpethein, turpethic acids A‑C, and two intact resin glycosides, turpethosides A and B, jalapinolic acid, and operculinolic acid.[27,28] Pinus roxburghii oleo‑resin mainly consists of α and β‑pinene, Δ‑3‑carene, longifolene, abietic acid and isopimaric acid and have been used as antiseptic, expectorant, carminative, antioxidant, anthelmintic, and analgesic. [29,30] The main objective of the work was to screen and evaluate antibacterial activity of methanolic extracts of C. myrrha (oleo‑gum‑resin), O. turpethum (glycosidic resin), P. roxburghii (oleo‑resin) against both multidrug resistance Gram‑positive as well as Gram‑negative bacteria.
Materials and Methods Plant materials The C. myrrha (oleo‑gum‑resin), O. turpethum (glycosidic resin) and P. roxburghii (oleo‑resin) were procured from local market of Delhi and identified by Dr. H.B. Singh, Scientist F and Head, Raw Materials Herbarium, and Museum, National Institute of Science Communication and Information Resources (NISCAIR), New Delhi. Voucher specimens (Nos. N/R/C/06‑07/803/120; National Research Council (NRC)/‑2007/08/842/26; N/R/ C/‑R007/08/851/35) were deposited in the NISCAIR, New Delhi.
Preparation of methanolic extracts The dried material of C. myrrha, O. turpethum and P. roxburghii were cleaned, and grounded into a coarse powder by a Multi‑Mill and passed through a sieve (20 mesh). Dried plant samples were further air‑dried in a ventilated oven at 45°C for 24 h, then grounded into a coarse powder and passed through a sieve as above. Each Powdered sample (100 g) was extracted separately with methanol (500 ml) for 12 h using Soxhlet apparatus. The methanolic extracts were filtered by a Millipore filter with a
266
0.45 μm nylon membrane under vacuum. The filtrates were concentrated under reduced pressure and freeze dried. The yield of methanolic extract of C. myrrha, O. turpethum and P. roxburghii was 7.4 g, 8.33 g and 93 g, respectively. The samples were stored at 4°C until use.
Microbial cultures and growth conditions Cultures of the Gram‑positive and Gram‑negative bacteria were kindly provided by ITL LABS Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi. Gram‑positive bacteria were Staphylococcus aureus (American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) 6538), Bacillus subtilis (ATCC 6633), Micrococcus luteus (MTCC 2470), Enterococcus faecalis (Microbial Type Culture Collection (ATCC) 439). Gram‑negative bacteria were Escherichia coli (MTCC 452), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (ATCC 25619), Salmonella typhi (ATCC 786), Shigella dysenteriae (MTCC 1457). Cultures of bacteria were grown on a nutrient broth at 37°C for 12 h and were maintained on respective agar slants at 4°C.
Antimicrobial assay by agar diffusion method Antimicrobial activity of resin rich methanolic extracts (RRMEs) was evaluated by agar diffusion method.[31] The freeze dried RRMEs of tested plants in concentration 100, 250, 500, and 1000 μg/ml were prepared in phosphate buffered saline (Phosphate Buffer Solution, pH 7.0) and sterilized by filtration through 0.22 μm sterilizing Millipore express filter. All bacteria were suspended in sterile water and diluted to ~106 Colony Forming Unit (CFU)/ml. The suspension (100 μl) was spread onto the surface of plate count agar medium. Wells (4.6 mm in diameter) were cut from the agar with a sterile borer and extract solutions (60 μl) were delivered into them. Negative controls were prepared using PBS solution. Tetracycline (30 μg/well) and streptomycin (30 μg/well) were used as a positive reference standards to determine the sensitivity of Gram‑positive and Gram‑negative bacterial species tested, respectively. The inoculated plates were incubated at 35°C for 24 h. Antibacterial activity was evaluated by measuring the diameter of inhibition zone of the tested bacteria, which was expressed in millimeters.
Results and Discussion The RRMEs of C. myrrha, O. turpethum and P. roxburghii were tested in different concentration for antibacterial effect against Gram‑positive (S. aureus, B. subtilis, M. luteus, E. faecalis) and Gram‑negative bacterial strains (E. coli, P. aeruginosa, S. typhi, S. dysenteriae). When tested by agar diffusion method the results obtained in the study showed that the RRMEs of C. myrrha showed significant activity against all Gram‑positive bacterial strains while variable effects against Gram‑negative bacterial strains [Table 1 and Figure 1]. The RRMEs of C. myrrha (100 μg/ml) exhibited maximum inhibition against P. aeruginosa that measured and inactive against E. coli and S. typhi. RRMEs of C. myrrha (250 μg/ml) showed maximum zone of inhibition against E. faecalis (12.9 mm) while inactive against S. typhi. Higher concentration of RRMEs of C. myrrha 500 μg/ml and 1000 μg/ml observed maximum Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences October-December 2013 Vol 5 Issue 4
Shuaib, et al.: Antibacterial activity of resin
Table 1: Antibacterial activity of RRMEs of Commiphora myrrha against Gram‑positive and Gram‑negative bacteria Sample code
A B C D Bl S S
Sample conc. (µg/ml)
1000 500 250 100 Control Tetracycline (30 mg/ml) Streptomycin (30 mg/ml)
Zone of inhibition (mm) Gram‑positive bacteria
Gram‑negative bacteria
Staphylococcus aureus
Bacillus subtilis
Micrococcus luteus
Enterococcus faecalis
Escherichia coli
Pseudomonas aeruginosa
Salmonella typhi
Shigella dysenteriae
14.5 12.2 10.3 8.1 ‑ 13.4
14.8 12.4 11.5 6.4 ‑ 14.5
13.3 13.3 10.1 7.4 ‑ 14.9
17.5 15.3 12.9 8.8 ‑ 13.5
13.5 7.2 6.6 ‑ ‑ ‑
14.3 13.6 12.5 11.4 ‑ ‑
8.1 4.6 ‑ ‑
12.8 12.1 10.9 5.4 ‑ ‑
‑
‑
‑
‑
13.8
14.0
13.3
13.8
RRMEs: Resin rich methanolic extracts
Table 2: Antibacterial activity of RRMEs of Operculina turpethum against Gram‑positive and Gram‑negative bacteria Sample code
A B C D Bl S S
Sample conc. (µg/ml)
1000 500 250 100 Control Tetracycline (30 mg/ml) Streptomycin (30 mg/ml)
Zone of inhibition (mm) Gram‑positive bacteria
Gram‑negative bacteria
Staphylococcus aureus
Bacillus subtilis
Micrococcus luteus
Enterococcus faecalis
Escherichia coli
Pseudomonas aeruginosa
Salmonella typhi
Shigella dysenteriae
17.4 15.5 11.7 9.8 ‑ 13.0
18.4 17.1 15.8 12.3 ‑ 15.1
12.7 10.8 7.8 7.2 ‑ 14.6
15.6 13.8 12.9 8.8 ‑ 13.7
14.5 14.1 13.2 6.4 ‑ ‑
17.6 16.8 15.9 11.5 ‑ ‑
14.8 13.8 12.8 8.9 ‑ ‑
14.8 12.7 12.7 6.0 ‑ ‑
‑
‑
‑
‑
15.3
12.7
14.6
14.7
RRMEs: Resin rich methanolic extracts
Table 3: Antibacterial activity of RRMEs of Pinus roxburghii against Gram‑positive and Gram‑negative bacteria Sample code
A B C D Bl S S
Sample conc. (µg/ml)
1000 500 250 100 Control Tetracycline (30 mg/ml) Streptomycin (30 mg/ml)
Zone of inhibition (mm) Gram‑positive bacteria
Gram‑negative bacteria
Staphylococcus aureus
Bacillus subtilis
Micrococcus luteus
Enterococcus faecalis
Escherichia coli
Pseudomonas aeruginosa
Salmonella typhi
Shigella dysenteriae
16.6 13.0 12.3 7.4 ‑ 13.9
14.0 13.1 9.3 6.5 ‑ 15.7
15.5 12.9 12.1 8.2 ‑ 13.2
18.4 15.6 12.3 10.4 ‑ 13.4
13.0 9.9 5.6 ‑ ‑ ‑
9.9 5.8 4.3 ‑ ‑ ‑
6.8 3.5 2.2 ‑ ‑ ‑
14.0 13.3 9.1 7.0 ‑ ‑
‑
‑
‑
‑
13.6
13.6
13.1
14.2
RRMEs: Resin rich methanolic extracts
activity against E. faecalis, which were 15.3 and 17.5 mm, respectively and minimum against S. typhi, which were 4.6 and 8.1 mm, respectively. The RRMEs of O. turpethum showed significant activity against all strains of both Gram‑positive and Gram‑negative bacteria at different concentrations [Table 2 and Figure 2]. The RRMEs of O. turpethum (100 μg/ml) observed maximum activity against B. subtilis (12.3 mm) and minimum against S. dysenteriae (6.0 mm). The RRMEs of O. turpethum (250 μg/ml) exhibited maximum activity against P. aeruginosa (15.9 mm) and B. subtilis (15.8 mm) while the minimum against M. luteus measured 7.8 mm. On increasing the concentration the RRMEs of O. turpethum 500 Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences October-December 2013 Vol 5 Issue 4
μg/ml and 1000 μg/ml showed the highest zone of inhibition toward B. subtilis (17.1 mm) and (18.4 mm), respectively and minimum against M. luteus (10.8 mm) and E. coli (14.5 mm), respectively when compared to other tested bacterial strains. The RRMEs of P. roxburghii exhibited better activity against Gram‑positive bacteria than Gram‑negative bacterial strains in a concentration dependent manner [Table 3 and Figure 3]. The RRMEs of P. roxburghii (100 μg/ml) did not exhibited inhibition against E. coli, P. aeruginosa and S. typhi, while in concentration (250 μg/ml) showed significant inhibition in S. aureus (12.3 mm), M. luteus (12.1 mm) and E. faecalis (12.3 mm) on comparison with standard. The RRMEs 267
Shuaib, et al.: Antibacterial activity of resin
Figure 1: Zones of inhibition produced by resin rich methanolic extracts of Commiphora myrrha at the tested concentrations (Bl = control; S = standard; A = 1000 μg/ml; B = 500 μg/ml; C = 250 μg/ml; 100 μg/ml)
toward plant extracts may be due to its cell wall structure and outer membrane.[32] Gram‑negative bacteria have an outer membrane and a unique periplasmic space, which is absent in Gram‑positive bacteria.[33,34] In Gram‑negative bacteria, the hydrophilic surface of outer membrane, which is rich in lipopolysaccharide molecules, providing a barrier against various antibiotics and is also associated with the enzymes that present in the periplasmic space capable of breaking down the molecules introduced from outside.[35‑37] Gram‑positive bacteria do not have such a protective outer membrane and cell wall configuration. Antibacterial substances cause destruction of the cytoplasmic membrane that result in a leakage of the cytoplasm and its coagulation.[31,38] This study suggested that the RRMEs of C. myrrha and P. roxburghii were more potent against Gram‑positive than Gram‑negative bacterial strains while RRMEs of O. turpethum were active against all tested microbial strains. The antibacterial activity of RRMEs of O. turpethum against both Gram‑positive and Gram‑negative bacteria may be due to its glycosidic resins.
Conclusion
Figure 2: Zones of inhibition produced by resin rich methanolic extracts of Operculina turpethum at the tested concentrations (Bl = control; S = standard; A = 1000 μg/ml; B = 500 μg/ml; C = 250 μg/ml; 100 μg/ml)
Our results allow us to conclude that the RRMEs of C. myrrha, O. turpethum and P. roxburghii exhibited some degree of antimicrobial activity against Gram‑positive (S. aureus, B. subtilis, M. luteus, E. faecalis) and Gram‑negative bacterial strains (E. coli, P. aeruginosa, S. typhi, S. dysenteriae). This probably explains the use of these plants by the indigenous people against a number of infections since generations. The comparable activity of RRMEs to some antibiotics may help to discover new chemical classes of antimicrobials that may be used for the topical treatment of disorders resulted from tested microbial strains. Further research should be highlighted on exploring the phytochemicals and medicinal worth of above tested plants.
Acknowledgments The authors are thankful to the ITL LABS Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi for providing the cultures of Gram‑positive and Gram‑negative bacterial strains. The authors are also thankful to the Department of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy, Jamia Hamdard, New Delhi for technical support. Figure 3: Zones of inhibition produced by resin rich methanolic extracts of Pinus roxburghii at the tested concentrations (Bl = control; S = standard; A = 1000 μg/ml; B = 500 μg/ml; C = 250 μg/ml; 100 μg/ml)
References 1. 2.
of P. roxburghii 500 μg/ml and 1000 μg/ml exhibited maximum inhibition against E. faecalis (15.6 mm) and (18.4 mm) respectively while the minimum against S. typhi measured 3.5 mm and 6.8 mm, respectively. In the present observations, C. myrrha and P. roxburghii extracts showed maximum activity against E. faecalis while the minimum against S. typhi. The extracts of O. turpethum were active against both Gram‑positive and Gram‑negative bacteria in which B. subtilis and S. aureus were the most sensitive. The maximum sensitivity of Gram‑positive bacterial strains
268
3. 4. 5. 6.
Borris RP. Natural products research: Perspectives from a major pharmaceutical company. J Ethnopharmacol 1996;51:29‑38. National Center for Infectious Diseases (NCID). Campaign to prevent antimicrobial resistance in healthcare settings. Centre for Disease Control and Prevention. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/ drugresistance/healthcare/problem.htm. [Updated 2006 Aug 12]. Chopra I, Hodgson J, Metcalf B, Poste G. New approaches to the control of infections caused by antibiotic‑resistant bacteria. An industry perspective. JAMA 1996;275:401‑3. Baquero F. Gram‑positive resistance: Challenge for the development of new antibiotics. J Antimicrob Chemother 1997;39 Suppl A: 1‑6. Kumar VP, Chauhan NS, Padh H, Rajani M. Search for antibacterial and antifungal agents from selected Indian medicinal plants. J Ethnopharmacol 2006;107:182‑8. Joshi B, Lekhak S, Sharma A. Antibacterial property of different medicinal plants: Ocimum sanctum, Cinnamomum zeylanicum, Xanthoxylum armatum and Origanum majorana. Kathmandu Univ J
Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences October-December 2013 Vol 5 Issue 4
Shuaib, et al.: Antibacterial activity of resin
7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15.
16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23.
Sci Eng Technol 2009;5:143‑50. Cowan MM. Plant products as antimicrobial agents. Clin Microbiol Rev 1999;12:564‑82. Das K, Tiwari RK, Shrivastava DK. Techniques for evaluation of medicinal plant products as antimicrobial agent: Current methods and future trends. J Med Plants Res 2010;4:104‑11. Zahin M, Aqil F, Khan MS, Ahmad I. Ethno medicinal plants derived antibacterials and their prospects. Ethno Med Source Complement Ther 2010:149‑78. Charles Evans W. Volatile oils and resins. Trease and Evans Pharmacognosy. 15th ed. China: Harcourt Publishers; 2002. p. 253‑7. Savluchinske‑Feio S, Curto MJ, Gigante B, Roseiro JC. Antimicrobial activity of resin acid derivatives. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 2006;72:430‑6. El Ashry ES, Rashed N, Salama OM, Saleh A. Components, therapeutic value and uses of myrrh. Pharmazie 2003;58:163‑8. Shen T, Lou Hx. Chemical constituents from resin of Commiphora species and their biological activities. Nat Prod Res Dev 2008;20:360‑6. Morteza‑Semnani K, Saeedi M. Constituents of the essential oil of Commiphora myrrha (Nees) Engl. var. molmol. J Essent Oil Res 2003;15:50‑1. Marongiu B, Piras A, Porcedda S, Scorciapino A. Chemical composition of the essential oil and supercritical CO2 extract of Commiphora myrrha (Nees) Engl. and of Acorus calamus L. J Agric Food Chem 2005;53:7939‑43. Nomicos EY. Myrrh: Medical marvel or myth of the Magi? Holist Nurs Pract 2007;21:308‑23. Tipton DA, Lyle B, Babich H, Dabbous MKh. In vitro cytotoxic and anti‑inflammatory effects of myrrh oil on human gingival fibroblasts and epithelial cells. Toxicol in vitro 2003;17:301‑10. Su S, Wang T, Duan JA, Zhou W, Hua YQ, Tang YP, et al . Anti‑inflammatory and analgesic activity of different extracts of Commiphora myrrha. J Ethnopharmacol 2011;134:251‑8. Shen T, Li GH, Wang XN, Lou Hx. The genus Commiphora : A review of its traditional uses, phytochemistry and pharmacology. J Ethnopharmacol 2012;142:319‑30. Anonymous.The Ayurvedic Pharmacopoeia of India. New Delhi: Department of Indian Systems of Medicine and Homeopathy; 2001. Anonymous. The Wealth of India: Raw Materials. New Delhi: Council of Scientific and Industrial Research; 2007. Kohli KR, Nipanikar SU, Kadbhane KP. A comprehensive review on TRIVRIT Operculina turpethum syn. Ipomoea turpethum. Int J Pharma Bio Sci 2010;1:443‑52. Bhande RM, Laakshmayya, Kumar P, Mahurkar NK, Setty SR. Pharmacological screening of root of O. perculina turpethum and
Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences October-December 2013 Vol 5 Issue 4
its formulations. Acta Pharmaceutica Sciencia 2006;48:11‑7. 24. Prakash VB, Mukherjee A. Hepato‑protective effect of an ayurvedic formulation Prak‑20 in CCl4 induced toxicity in rats: Results of three studies. Int J Pharm Clin Res 2010;2:23‑7. 25. Rashid MH, Gafur MA, Sadik MG, Rahman MA. Antibacterial and cytotoxic activities of extracts and isolated compounds of Ipomoea turpethum. Pak J Biol Sci 2002;5:597‑9. 26. Anbuselvam C, Vijayavel K, Balasubramanian MP. Protective effect of Operculina turpethum against 7,12‑dimethyl benz (a) anthracene induced oxidative stress with reference to breast cancer in experimental rats. Chem Biol Interact 2007;168:229‑36. 27. Ding W, Jiang ZH, Wu P, Xu L, Wei X. Resin glycosides from the aerial parts of Operculina turpethum. Phytochemistry 2012;81:165‑74. 28. Wagner H, Wenzel G, Chari VM. The turpethinic acids of Ipomoea turpethum L. chemical constituents of the convolvulaceae resins‑III. Planta Medica 1978;33:144‑51. 29. Anonymous. The Wealth of India: Raw Materials. New Delhi: Council of Scientific and Industrial Research; 2005. 30. Coppen JJ, Robinson JM, Kaushal AN. Composition of xylem resin from Pinus wallichiana and P. roxburghii. Phytochemistry 1988;27:2873‑5. 31. Shan B, Cai YZ, Brooks JD, Corke H. The in vitro antibacterial activity of dietary spice and medicinal herb extracts. Int J Food Microbiol 2007;117:112‑9. 32. Zaika LL. Spices and herbs: Their antimicrobial activity and its determination. J Food Nutr 1988;9:97‑118. 33. Nikaido H. Outer membrane. In: Neidhardt FC, editor. Escherichia coli and Salmonella typhimurium: Cellular and Molecular Biology. Washington, D.C: American Society for Microbiology Press; 1996. p. 29‑47. 34. Duffy CF, Power RF. Antioxidant and antimicrobial properties of some Chinese plant extracts. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2001;17:527‑9. 35. Russell AD. Mechanisms of bacterial resistance to non‑antibiotics: Food additives and food and pharmaceutical preservatives. J Appl Bacteriol 1991;71:191‑201. 36. Nikaido H. Prevention of drug access to bacterial targets: Permeability barriers and active efflux. Science 1994;264:382‑8. 37. Gao Y, van Belkum MJ, Stiles ME. The outer membrane of gram‑negative bacteria inhibits antibacterial activity of brochocin‑C. Appl Environ Microbiol 1999;65:4329‑33. 38. Kalemba D, Kunicka A. Antibacterial and antifungal properties of essential oils. Curr Med Chem 2003;10:813‑29. Source of Support: Nil, Conflict of Interest: None declared.
269
Copyright of Journal of Pharmacy & Bioallied Sciences is the property of Medknow Publications & Media Pvt. Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
