Inhibition of Klebsiella pneumoniae growth by selected Australian plants: natural approaches for the prevention and management of ankylosing spondylitis

Winnett, Veronica; Sirdaarta, Joseph; White, Alan; Clarke, Frank M.; Cock, Ian Edwin

doi:10.1007/s10787-017-0328-1

Cited by 35 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Phytochemical analysis of the P. novae-hollandiae leaf extracts for the presence of saponins, phenolic compounds, flavonoids, phytosteroids, triterpenoids, cardiac glycosides, anthraquinones, tannins and alkaloids was conducted by standard assays. [15][16][17] Antibacterial Screening…”

Section: Qualitative Phytochemical Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Piper novae-hollandiae Miq. Leaf Extracts Lack Antibacterial activity and are Non-Toxic in vitro

Mpala¹,

Chikowe²,

Cock³

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Closely related plant species often share similar secondary metabolites and bioactivities and are therefore good targets for bioactivity testing when one or more species within a genus are known to possess therapeutic properties. The genus Piper has a long history of medicinal usage in many areas of the world. Many Piper spp. are known to have therapeutic properties and several have antibacterial bioactivities. Methods: The ability of P. novae-hollandiae leaf extracts to inhibit the growth of a panel of bacterial pathogens was investigated by disc diffusion assay. Toxicity was examined using the Artemia franciscana nauplii bioassay. Results: P. novae-hollandiae methanolic and aqueous extracts were completely ineffective at inhibiting the growth of panels of gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria. The extracts were nontoxic or of low toxicity to Artemia nauplii following 24 h exposure. Conclusion: Despite the close taxonomic relationship with several bioactive Piper spp. and its therapeutic use by first Australians, P. novae-hollandiae leaf extracts were completely ineffective bacterial growth inhibitors. However, these extracts may have other therapeutic properties and testing against protozoa, fungi, virus and tumour cells is warranted.

show abstract

Section: Qualitative Phytochemical Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Piper novae-hollandiae Miq. Leaf Extracts Lack Antibacterial activity and are Non-Toxic in vitro

Mpala¹,

Chikowe²,

Cock³

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Phytochemical analysis of the W. fruticosa leaf extracts for the presence of saponins, phenolic compounds, flavonoids, phytosteroids, triterpenoids, cardiac glycosides, anthraquinones, tannins and alkaloids was conducted by standard assays. [30][31][32]…”

Section: Qualitative Phytochemical Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Westringa fruticosa (Willd.) Druce Leaf and Flower Extracts Lack Antibacterial Activity and are Non-toxic in vitro

Chikowe¹,

Mpala²,

Cock³

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Closely related plant species often share similar secondary metabolites and bioactivities and are therefore good targets for bioactivity testing when one or more species within a family are known to possess therapeutic properties. The family Laminaceae has a long history of medicinal usage globally. Many species are known to have therapeutic properties, several species of which have well established antibacterial bioactivities. Methods: The ability of Westringa fruticosa leaf and flower extracts to inhibit the growth of a panel of bacterial and fungal pathogens was investigated by disc diffusion assay. Toxicity was examined using the Artemia franciscana nauplii bioassay. Results: W. fruticosa leaf methanolic and aqueous extracts were both completely ineffective at inhibiting the growth of gram-positive and gram-negative panels of bacteria, as well as fungi. The extracts were non-toxic or of low toxicity in the Artemia bioassay following 24 h exposure. Conclusion: Despite the taxonomic relationship to several bioactive Laminaceae spp., W. fruticosa leaf and flower extracts were completely ineffective bacterial and fungal growth inhibitors. However, these extracts may have other therapeutic properties and testing against protozoa, virus and tumour cells is required.

show abstract

“…leaf and flower extracts for the presence of saponins, phenolic compounds, flavonoids, phytosteroids, triterpenoids, cardiac glycosides, anthraquinones, tannins and alkaloids was conducted by standard assays. [11][12][13] Antibacterial screening Test microorganisms…”

Section: Qualitative Phytochemical Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grevillea juncifolia Hook. and Grevillea robusta A. Cunn. Ex. R. Br. Methanolic Leaf and Flower Extracts Inhibit the Growth of Gram Positive and Gram Negative Bacteria

Cock¹

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: The development of multi-antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria has necessitated the search for new effective antibacterial therapies. Several Grevillea spp. were used traditionally to treat pathogenic illness and are rich in phytocompounds with antibacterial activity. Despite this, the antibacterial activity of Australian Grevillea spp. extracts have not been extensively examined. Methods: The ability of G. juncifolia and G. robusta leaf and flower extracts to inhibit the growth of gram-negative and gram-positive bacterial species and some fungi was investigated by disc diffusion assays. The growth inhibitory activity was further quantified by MIC determination. Toxicity was determined using the Artemia franciscana nauplii bioassay. Results: The G. juncifolia and G. robusta extracts were good inhibitors of the growth of both gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria yet were completely ineffective against all fungal species tested. The leaf extracts generally had better antibacterial activity than the flower extracts. The G. juncifolia leaf extract was a particularly good inhibitor of A. faecalis, P. fluorescens, Y. entercolitica and B. subtilis growth, with MIC values of 62, 533, 736 and 682µg/mL respectively. The G. robusta leaf extract was a potent inhibitor of B. cereus and B. subtilis growth (145 and 83µg/mL respectively). That extract was also a good inhibitor of A. faecalis, P. fluorescens, S. salford, S. aureus and S. epidermidis growth, albeit with substantially higher MIC values. In contrast, none of the extracts inhibited fungal growth. All extracts were determined to be non-toxic in the Artemia franciscana nauplii bioassay, indicating their safety for the treatment of bacterial infections. Conclusion: The lack of toxicity of the G. juncifolia and G. robusta extracts and their growth inhibitory bioactivity against grampositive and gram-negative bacteria indicate their potential in the development of new antibiotic chemotherapies.

show abstract

Inhibition of Klebsiella pneumoniae growth by selected Australian plants: natural approaches for the prevention and management of ankylosing spondylitis

Cited by 35 publications

References 30 publications

Piper novae-hollandiae Miq. Leaf Extracts Lack Antibacterial activity and are Non-Toxic in vitro

Piper novae-hollandiae Miq. Leaf Extracts Lack Antibacterial activity and are Non-Toxic in vitro

Westringa fruticosa (Willd.) Druce Leaf and Flower Extracts Lack Antibacterial Activity and are Non-toxic in vitro

Grevillea juncifolia Hook. and Grevillea robusta A. Cunn. Ex. R. Br. Methanolic Leaf and Flower Extracts Inhibit the Growth of Gram Positive and Gram Negative Bacteria

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About