Investigating the effect of aqueous extracts (Oregano and Marjoram) on the wild strain of Escherichia coli in chicken farms with colibacillosis in Yasuj, Iran
محورهای موضوعی : میکروبیولوژیshahram shahriary 1 , Amir Amniattalab 2
1 - Department of Veterinary Medicine, Y. C., Islamic Azad University, Yasooj, Iran
2 - Department of Pathobiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ur. C. ,Islamic Azad University, Urmia, Iran
کلید واژه: Oregano, Marjoram, Mixed extract, Poultry, Colibacillosis,
چکیده مقاله :
Aqueous extracts were prepared from two plants (Oregano and Marjoram) using the percolation method. The antibacterial activity of Escherichia coli (colibacillosis) in specific culture media was assessed by dipping sterile filter paper, sized like antibiogram tablets, into aqueous extracts of varying concentrations. These were then subjected to diffusion and incubation to evaluate microbial sensitivity. The microbial sensitivity test of the extracts showed that the diameter of the non-growth halo of Oregano aqueous extract was 18.3 mm at 100% concentration, 15.1 mm at 75%, and 11.2 mm at 50%, with an insignificant halo at 25% concentration. For the mixed extract, the growth inhibition halo was 19.4 mm at 100%, 16.3 mm at 75%, and 11.4 mm at 50%, with a very small halo at 25%. The largest halo for the wild Marjoram aqueous extract was 11.5 mm at 100% concentration, decreasing to 10.1 mm at 75%, and was very insignificant at 50% and 25% concentrations. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of bacteria by Oregano extract was 20 mg/ml, mixed extract was 15 mg/ml, and Marjoram extract was 130 mg/ml, showing a direct relationship with the increase in dilution of the extracts. The minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC) for Oregano extract was 60 mg/ml, for the mixed aqueous extract was 55 mg/ml, and for the wild Marjoram aqueous extract was 220 mg/ml. The results showed that the aqueous extract of Oregano and the mixed extract (Oregano and wild Marjoram) had greater antibacterial properties than the aqueous extract of Marjoram. Thus, aqueous extracts of plants can be used as a cheap and available source for therapeutic use and even prevention against bacterial infections and are a good alternative to antibiotics.
Aqueous extracts were prepared from two plants (Oregano and Marjoram) using the percolation method. The antibacterial activity of Escherichia coli (colibacillosis) in specific culture media was assessed by dipping sterile filter paper, sized like antibiogram tablets, into aqueous extracts of varying concentrations. These were then subjected to diffusion and incubation to evaluate microbial sensitivity. The microbial sensitivity test of the extracts showed that the diameter of the non-growth halo of Oregano aqueous extract was 18.3 mm at 100% concentration, 15.1 mm at 75%, and 11.2 mm at 50%, with an insignificant halo at 25% concentration. For the mixed extract, the growth inhibition halo was 19.4 mm at 100%, 16.3 mm at 75%, and 11.4 mm at 50%, with a very small halo at 25%. The largest halo for the wild Marjoram aqueous extract was 11.5 mm at 100% concentration, decreasing to 10.1 mm at 75%, and was very insignificant at 50% and 25% concentrations. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of bacteria by Oregano extract was 20 mg/ml, mixed extract was 15 mg/ml, and Marjoram extract was 130 mg/ml, showing a direct relationship with the increase in dilution of the extracts. The minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC) for Oregano extract was 60 mg/ml, for the mixed aqueous extract was 55 mg/ml, and for the wild Marjoram aqueous extract was 220 mg/ml. The results showed that the aqueous extract of Oregano and the mixed extract (Oregano and wild Marjoram) had greater antibacterial properties than the aqueous extract of Marjoram. Thus, aqueous extracts of plants can be used as a cheap and available source for therapeutic use and even prevention against bacterial infections and are a good alternative to antibiotics.
[1] Davies KD, Le AT, Theodoro MF, Skokan MC, Aisner DL, Berge EM, et al. Identifying and targeting ROS1 gene fusions in non–small cell lung cancer. Clinical Cancer Research. 2012; 18(17): 4570-4579.
doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-0550
[2] Ruoslahti E. Fibronectin and its receptors. Annual Review of Biochemistry. 1988; 57: 375-413.
doi:10.1146/annurev.bi.57.070188.002111
[3] Koide A, Bailey CW, Huang X, Koide S. The fibronectin type III domain as a scaffold for novel binding proteins. Journal of Molecular Biology. 1998; 284(4): 1141-1151. doi:10.1006/jmbi.1998.2238
[4] Awad MM, Katayama R, McTigue M, Liu W, Deng YL, Brooun A, et al. Acquired resistance to crizotinib from a mutation in CD74–ROS1. The New England Journal of Medicine. 2013; 368(25):2395-2401. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1215530
[5] Chen G, Seukep AJ, Guo M. Recent advances in molecular docking for the research and discovery of potential marine drugs. Marine Drugs. 2020; 18(11): 545. doi:10.3390/md18110545
[6] Kozakov D, Hall DR, Xia B, Porter KA, Padhorny D, Yueh C, et al. The ClusPro web server for protein–protein docking. Nature Protocols. 2017; 12(2): 255-278. doi:10.1038/nprot.2016.169
[7] Demetri GD, De Braud F, Drilon A, Siena S, Patel MR, Cho BC, et al. Updated integrated analysis of the efficacy and safety of entrectinib in patients with NTRK fusion-positive solid tumors. Clinical Cancer Research. 2022; 28(7): 1302-1312. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-21-3597
[8] Kozakov D, Hall DR, Xia B, Porter KA, Padhorny D, Yueh C, et al. The ClusPro web server for protein–protein docking. Nature Protocols. 2017; 12(2): 255-278. doi:10.1038/nprot.2016.169
[9] Charest A, Wilker EW, McLaughlin ME, Lane K, Gowda R, Coven S, et al. ROS fusion tyrosine kinase activates a SH2 domain–containing phosphatase-2/phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/mammalian target of rapamycin signaling axis to form glioblastoma in mice. Cancer Research. 2006; 66(15): 7473-7481. doi:10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-1193
[10] Vilachã JF, Wassenaar TA, Marrink SJ. Structural aspects of the ROS1 kinase domain and oncogenic mutations. Crystals. 2024; 14(2): 106.
doi:10.3390/cryst14020106
[11] MacKerell AD Jr, Jo S, Lakkaraju SK, Lind C, Yu W. Identification and characterization of fragment binding sites for allosteric ligand design using the Site Identification by Ligand Competitive Saturation Hotspots approach (SILCS-Hotspots). Biochimica et Biophysica Acta - General Subjects. 2020; 1864(4): 129519.
doi:10.1016/j.bbagen.2020.129519
[12] Luo Z, Liu C, Quan P, Yang D, Zhao H, Wan X, Fang L. Mechanistic insights of the controlled release capacity of polar functional group in transdermal drug delivery system: the relationship of hydrogen bonding strength and controlled release capacity. Acta Pharmaceutica Sinica B. 2020; 10(5): 928-945. doi:10.1016/j.apsb.2019.11.014
[13] Sahoo S, Lee HK, Shin D. Structure-based virtual screening and molecular dynamics studies to explore potential natural inhibitors against 3C protease of foot-and-mouth disease virus. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2023; 10: 1340126.
doi:10.3389/fvets.2023.1340126
[14] Patil R, Das S, Stanley A, Yadav L, Sudhakar A, Varma AK. Optimized hydrophobic interactions and hydrogen bonding at the target-ligand interface leads the pathways of drug-designing. PLoS One. 2010; 5(8): e12029.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0012029
[15] Rahman S, Liu H, Shah M, Almutairi MM, Liaqat I, Tanaka T, Chen CC, Alouffi A, Ali A. Prediction of potential drug targets and key inhibitors (ZINC67974679, ZINC67982856, and ZINC05668040) against Rickettsia felis using integrated computational approaches. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2024; 11: 1507496.
doi:10.3389/fvets.2024.1507496
[16] Li T, Guo R, Zong Q, Ling G. Application of molecular docking in elaborating molecular mechanisms and interactions of supramolecular cyclodextrin. Carbohydrate Polymers. 2022; 276: 118644. doi:10.1016/j.carbpol.2021.118644
[17] Hashimoto K, Watanabe S, Akutsu M, Muraki N, Kamishina H, Furukawa Y, et al. Intrinsic structural vulnerability in the hydrophobic core induces species-specific aggregation of canine SOD1 with degenerative myelopathy–linked E40K mutation. Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2023; 299(6): 104798. doi:10.1016/j.jbc.2023.104798
[18] Thomford NE, Senthebane DA, Rowe A, Munro D, Seele P, Maroyi A, Dzobo K. Natural products for drug discovery in the 21st century: Innovations for novel drug discovery. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2018;19(6):1578.
doi:10.3390/ijms19061578
