Open Access
Open Peer Review

This article has Open Peer Review reports available.

How does Open Peer Review work?

Antibacterial and antibiotic resistance modifying activity of the extracts from allanblackia gabonensis, combretum molle and gladiolus quartinianus against Gram-negative bacteria including multi-drug resistant phenotypes

BMC Complementary and Alternative MedicineThe official journal of the International Society for Complementary Medicine Research (ISCMR)201515:206

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12906-015-0726-0

Received: 19 April 2015

Accepted: 15 June 2015

Published: 30 June 2015

Abstract

Background

Bacterial resistance to antibiotics is becoming a serious problem worldwide. The discovery of new and effective antimicrobials and/or resistance modulators is necessary to tackle the spread of resistance or to reverse the multi-drug resistance. We investigated the antibacterial and antibiotic-resistance modifying activities of the methanol extracts from Allanblackia gabonensis, Gladiolus quartinianus and Combretum molle against 29 Gram-negative bacteria including multi-drug resistant (MDR) phenotypes.

Methods

The broth microdilution method was used to determine the minimal inhibitory concentrations (MIC) and minimal bactericidal concentrations (MBC) of the samples meanwhile the standard phytochemical methods were used for the preliminary phytochemical screening of the plant extracts.

Results

Phytochemical analysis showed the presence of alkaloids, flavonoids, phenols and tannins in all studied extracts. Other chemical classes of secondary metabolites were selectively presents. Extracts from A. gabonensis and C. molle displayed a broad spectrum of activity with MICs varying from 16 to 1024 μg/mL against about 72.41 % of the tested bacteria. The extract from the fruits of A. gabonensis had the best activity, with MIC values below 100 μg/mL on 37.9 % of tested bacteria. Percentages of antibiotic-modulating effects ranging from 67 to 100 % were observed against tested MDR bacteria when combining the leaves extract from C. molle (at MIC/2 and MIC/4) with chloramphenicol, kanamycin, streptomycin and tetracycline.

Conclusion

The overall results of the present study provide information for the possible use of the studied plant, especially Allanblackia gabonensis and Combretum molle in the control of Gram-negative bacterial infections including MDR species as antibacterials as well as resistance modulators.

Keywords

Efflux pumps Extracts Gram-negative bacteria MDR bacteria Resistance modulators

Background

Infectious diseases caused by multi-drug resistant (MDR) Gram-negative bacteria are worldwide health concern, causing increasingly morbidity and mortality particularly in developing countries [1]. In Cameroon, previous studies showed high levels of resistance to commonly used antibiotics in Gram-negative bacilli [2]. Several reports also mentioned an increase in the hospital dissemination of bacterial strains specifically those expressing drug efflux mechanism [3, 4]. Against Gram-negative bacteria, the discovery of efflux pump inhibitors (EPIs) is an attractive strategy to combat MDR phenotypes [5]. EPI generally interact with specific efflux pump proteins to restore the susceptibility of MDR bacteria to antibiotics [6]. Medicinal plants constitute an important source of chemotherapeutic molecules, in regards to the chemical diversity found in several species [7, 8]. In recent years, some plants have been successfully evaluated for their direct antibacterial action, and for their antibiotic-modulation activity [912]. In the present work, we hypothesized that herbal medicines traditionally used for the treatment of infectious diseases could contain molecules acting as antibacterial and/or antibiotic-resistance modulators. This study was therefore designed to investigate the in vitro antibacterial and antibiotic-resistance modifying activities of the methanol extracts from Allanblackia gabonensis Pellegr. (Clusiaceae), Gladiolus quartinianus A. Rich (Iridaceae) and Combretum molle R. Br. ex G. Don (Combretaceae) against Gram-negative bacteria including multi-drug phenotypes. These plants are traditionally used to manage various ailments including bacterial related infections.

Methods

Plant materials and extraction

Medicinal plants used in this work were collected in different areas of Cameroon between January and April 2012. The plants were identified at the National Herbarium (Yaoundé, Cameroon), where voucher specimens were deposited under the reference numbers (Table 1). The air-dried and powdered plant material was weighed (300 g) and soaked in 1 L of methanol (MeOH) for 48 h at room temperature. The filtrate obtained through Whatman filter paper No. 1 was concentrated under reduced pressure in vacuum to obtain the crude extracts. All crude extracts were then kept at 4 °C until further uses.
Table 1

Plants used in the present study and evidence of their bioactivities

Samples, family, and herbarium numbera

Traditional treatment

Area of plant collection

Known bioactive or potentially active compounds

Screened biological activities of the crude extracts and known bioactive compounds

Allanblackia gabonensis Pellegr. (Clusiaceae); 17275SRF/Cam

Dysentery, cold, toothache [13]; pain, rheumatism, inflammations [14, 15].

Lebialem, South West region of Cameroon; (4°10′N 9°14′E/4.167°N 9.233°E)

Not reported

Crude extracts: Analgesic and anti-inlammatory effect of aqueous extract of the stem bark [14]; crude methanol fruits extracts (40 μg/mL) showed to inhibit growth of CCRF-CEM leukemia cells at about 50 % [16].

Gladiolus quartinianus A. Rich (Iridaceae); 17260/SRF/Cam

Infections of the skin, gut, urogenital system, and upper respiratory tract [17], gonorrhea, infectious conditions, constipation and dysentery [18].

Lebialem, South-West region of Cameroon; (4°10′N 9°14′E/4.167°N 9.233°E)

Not reported

Methanol crude extract was reported to possess moderate to significant anticancer activity (IC50: 29.60 to10.57 μg/mL) against drug-resistance cancer cell lines [16]

Combretum molle R. Br. ex G. Don (Combretaceae); 33311/ HNC

Fever, abdominal pains, convulsion, worm infections, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/acquiredimmune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) related infections [19]; hookworm, snake bite, leprosy, dysentery, general body swellings, arthritic and other inflammatory conditions, sterility, constipation [20, 21]; Parasitic, protozoan, infectious diseases [22], malaria [23]

University of Dschang, West region of Cameroon; (6°30′N 10°30′E/6.500°N 10.500°E)

Mollic acid glucoside [21]); β-D-glucopyranosyl 2α,3β,6β-trihydroxy-23-galloylolean-12-en-28-oate,combregenin, arjungenin, arjunglucoside I, and combreglucoside [24] .

Crude extracts were evaluated for: antibacterial activity [2527]; antimycobacterial [28]; antifungal effects [29]; antimalarial [30]; anthelmintic activities [31]; anti-HIV by inhibition of ribonuclease-H [19]; Cytotoxic effects against T-24 bladder cancer cells [32]; Anti-inflammatory activity [24]; in vitro anticholinesterase and inhibitory effects on Rabbit Breathing [33]. Compounds: mollic acid glucoside (MAG) showed analgesic, anti-inflammatory properties in mice and rats [21], cardiovascular effect [34]; hypoglycaemic effect [35]; Punicalgin and CM-A, two isolated tannins were assessed for their anti-HIV activity against human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) and type 2 (HIV-2) [36].

aPlants were identified at the Cameroon National Herbarium (HNC)

Chemicals for antibacterial assays

Eight commonly used antibiotics including tetracycline (TET), kanamycin (KAN), streptomycin (STR), ciprofloxacin (CIP), norfloxacin (NOR), chloramphenicol (CHL), ampicillin (AMP), erythromycin (ERY) (Sigma-Aldrich, St Quentin Fallavier, France) were used. The p-Iodonitrotetrazolium chloride 0.2 % (INT) and phenylalanine arginine β-naphthylamide (PAβN) (Sigma-Aldrich) were used as bacterial growth indicator and efflux pumps inhibitor respectively.

Microorganisms and growth conditions

Pathogenic bacteria used in the study were Gram-negative bacteria including MDR isolates (Laboratory collection) and reference strains (American Type Culture Collection) of Escherichia coli (ATCC8739, ATCC10536, AG100, AG100A, AG100ATet, AG102, MC4100 W3110), Enterobacter aerogenes (ATCC13048, CM64, EA27, EA3, EA289, EA298, EA294), Klebsiella pneumoniae (ATCC11296, KP55, KP63, K24, K2), Enterobacter cloacae (ECCI69, BM47, BM67), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA01, PA124) and Providencia stuartii (ATCC29916, NEA16, PS2636, PS299645) were used. Their features were previously reported [37]. They were maintained at 4 °C and sub-cultured on a fresh appropriate Mueller Hinton Agar (MHA) for 24 h before any antibacterial test.

Preliminary phytochemical investigation

The plant extracts were screened for the presence of major secondary metabolite classes such as alkaloids, anthocyanins, anthraquinones, flavonoids, phenols, saponins, sterols and triterpenes according to common phytochemical methods previously described [38]. The tests were based on visual observation of the change in color or formation of precipitate after the addition of specific reagents.

Antibacterial assays

MICs and MBCs of the plant extracts and chloramphenicol were determined by microdilution method using rapid INT colorimetric assay [25, 39]. Briefly, the samples were first dissolved in 10 % Dimethyl-sulfoxide (DMSO)/Mueller Hinton Broth (MHB). The solution obtained was then added to MHB and serially diluted two fold (in a 96-well microplate). One hundred microliters of inoculum (1.5× 106 CFU/mL) prepared in MHB were then added. The plates were covered with a sterile plate sealer and then agitated with a shaker to mix the contents of the wells and incubated at 37 °C for 18 h. The final concentration of DMSO was less than 2.5 %, and did not affect the microbial growth. Wells containing MHB, 100 μL of inoculum, and DMSO at a final concentration of 2.5 % served as the negative control. The MIC of each sample was detected after 18 h of incubation at 37 °C following addition of 40 μL INT (0.2 mg/mL) and incubation at 37 °C for 30 min. Viable bacteria reduced the yellow dye to a pink. The MIC was defined as the lowest sample concentration that prevented this change and that resulted in the complete inhibition of bacterial growth. The MBC of the sample was determined by sub-culturing 50 μL of the suspensions from the wells which did not show any growth after incubation during MIC assays to 150 μl of fresh broth, and re-incubated at 37 °C for 48 h before revelation. The MBC was defined as the lowest concentration of sample which completely inhibited the growth of bacteria [40]. Each assay was performed in three independent tests in triplicate. The samples were also tested in the presence of phenylalanine arginine β-naphthylamide (PAβN) at a final concentration of 20 μg/mL as previously described [41] on nine MDR bacteria. All assays were performed three time in duplicate.

Antibiotic-modulation assay

To evaluate the antibiotic resistance modifying activity of the extracts, the MIC of antibiotic was determined in the presence or absence of the plant extracts. The 96-wells plate modulation method, as described by Stavri et al. [42] was used. Briefly, after serial dilutions of antibiotics (256–0.5 μg/mL), the plant extracts at their sub-inhibitory concentrations (MIC/2 and MIC/4; selected after preliminary study; Table 2), were added and inoculation was done. The MIC was determined as described above. Modulation factors (MF), calculated as MIC Antibiotic alone/MIC Antibiotic alone + Extract; was used to express the modulating or synergy effects of the plant extracts.
Table 2

MIC of antibiotics in combination with extracts at sub-inhibitory concentrations against P. aeruginosa PA124

Plant extractsa

Antibiotcsb

 

CHL

AMP

ERY

KAN

STR

TET

CIP

NFX

ATB Alone

64

-

128

128

64

16

32

128

AGR

MIC/2

64(1)

- (NA)

128(1)

16(2)

32(2)

16(1)

32(1)

128(1)

MIC/4

64(1)

- (NA)

128(1)

16(2)

64(1)

16(1)

32(1)

128(1)

MIC/8

64(1)

- (NA)

128(1)

128(1)

64(1)

16(1)

32(1)

128(1)

MIC/16

64(1)

- (NA)

128(1)

128(1)

64(1)

16(1)

32(1)

128(1)

AGB

MIC/2

64(1)

- (NA)

128(1)

128(1)

32(2)

8(2)

32(1)

128(1)

MIC/4

64(1)

- (NA)

128(1)

128(1)

64(1)

16(1)

32(1)

128(1)

MIC/8

64(1)

- (NA)

128(1)

128(1)

64(1)

16(1)

32(1)

128(1)

MIC/16

64(1)

- (NA)

128(1)

128(1)

64(1)

16(1)

32(1)

128(1)

AGL

MIC/2

64(1)

- (NA)

128(1)

16(2)

64(1)

16(1)

32(1)

128(1)

MIC/4

64(1)

- (NA)

128(1)

128(1)

64(1)

16(1)

32(1)

128(1)

MIC/8

64(1)

- (NA)

128(1)

128(1)

64(1)

16(1)

32(1)

128(1)

MIC/16

64(1)

- (NA)

128(1)

128(1)

64(1)

16(1)

32(1)

128(1)

AGF

MIC/2

32(2)

- (NA)

128(1)

64(2)

32(2)

16(1)

32(1)

128(1)

MIC/4

64(1)

- (NA)

128(1)

64(2)

32(2)

16(1)

32(1)

128(1)

MIC/8

64(1)

- (NA)

128(1)

64(2)

64(1)

16(1)

32(1)

128(1)

MIC/16

64(1)

- (NA)

128(1)

64(2)

64(1)

16(1)

32(1)

128(1)

AGFl

MIC/2

64(1)

- (NA)

128(1)

64(2)

64(1)

8(2)

32(1)

128(1)

MIC/4

64(1)

- (NA)

128(1)

64(2)

64(1)

16(1)

32(1)

128(1)

MIC/8

64(1)

- (NA)

128(1)

64(2)

64(1)

16(1)

32(1)

128(1)

MIC/16

64(1)

- (NA)

128(1)

128

64(1)

16(1)

32(1)

128(1)

GQW

MIC/2

64(1)

- (NA)

128(1)

64(2)

32(2)

16(1)

32(1)

128(1)

MIC/4

64(1)

- (NA)

128(1)

64(2)

64(1)

16(1)

32(1)

128(1)

MIC/8

64(1)

- (NA)

128(1)

128

64(1)

16(1)

32(1)

128(1)

MIC/16

64(1)

- (NA)

256(0.5)

128

64(1)

16(1)

32(1)

128(1)

CML

MIC/2

32(2)

- (NA)

64(2)

64(2)

32(2)

4(4)

16(2)

16(2)

MIC/4

32(2)

- (NA)

64(2)

64(2)

32(2)

4(4)

16(2)

16(2)

MIC/8

64(1)

- (NA)

128(−)

64(2)

64(1)

8(2)

32(1)

128(1)

MIC/16

641)

- (NA)

128(−)

64(2)

64(1)

8(2)

32(1)

128(1)

a : Plan extracts: (AGFl : Allanblackia gabonensis Flowers, AGF : Allanblackia gabonensis Fruits, AGL: Allanblackia gabonensis Leaves, AGB: Allanblackia gabonensis Stem barks, AGR: Allanblackia gabonensis Root barks, GQW: Gladiolus quartinianus Whole plant, CML: Combretum molle Leaves); b :Antibiotics (TET: tetracycline, KAN: kanamycin, STR: streptomycin, ERY: erythromycin, CHL: chloramphenicol, NFX: norfloxacin, CIP: ciprofloxacin, AMP: ampicillin); − : MIC not detected at up to 256 μg/mL; (): Modulation factor or gain of activity; NA: Not applicable, Values in bold represent the modulation factor ≥ 2, the selected extracts and its concentrations to be used on others MDR bacteria

Results

Phytochemical Screening of the plant extracts

The main classes of secondary metabolites for each extract were screened and the results are summarized in Table 3. Tannins, flavonoids, alkaloids and phenols were present in all tested extracts. Others classes of botanicals were selectively distributed in different plant extracts.
Table 3

Qualitative phytochemical composition of the plant extracts

Plant samples

Phytochemical composition

Triterpenes

Flavonoids

Alkaloids

Anthraquinones

Phenols

Anthocyanines

Saponins

Tannins

Steroids

Allanblackia gabonensis

-

+

+

+

+

+

_

+

-

-

+

+

-

+

+

-

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

-

+

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

-

Gladiolus quartinianus

+

+

+

-

+

+

-

+

+

Combretum molle

-

+

+

-

+

-

+

+

+

(+): present; (−): absent

Antibacterial activity of the plant extracts

The results summarized in Table 4 show that all extracts were active on at least three of bacterial strains, with MIC values varying from 16 to 1024 μg/mL. Extracts from Combretum molle leaves (CML) and Allanblackia gabonensis displayed the most important spectrum of activity. Their inhibitory effects were observed on 72.41 % (27/29) for CML of the tested bacteria, 58.62 % (17/29) for leaves (AGL), 75.86 % (22/29) for flower (AGFl) and bark (AGB), 79.31 % (23/29) for bark and 86.20 % (25/29) for fruits (AGF) extracts from Allanblackia gabonensis. AGF was the best extract with MIC values below 100 μg/mL on 38 % (11/29) of the tested bacteria. CML mostly showed moderate activity with MIC values ranging from 128–512 μg/mL. The activity of CHL was comparable to that of plant extracts in certain cases. This was the case with AGF, AGFl and AGR against K. pneumoniae Kp55 (64 μg/mL); AGF against K. pneumoniae Kp53 (64 μg/mL), and AGFl against P. stuartii PS2636 (32 μg/mL). MICs values equal or above 1024 μg/mL were obtained with the extract from G. quartinianus (GQW). MBCs values were generally equal or below 1024 μg/mL (Table 4).
Table 4

Minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimal bactericidal (MBC) of the plant extracts and CHL on the studied bacterial species

Bacteria used

Tested samples, MIC and MBC (μg/mL)

Allanblackia gabonensis

Gladiolus quartinianus (GQW)

Combretum molle (CML)

Chloramphenicol

Flowers (AGFl)

Fruits (AGF)

Leave (AGL)

Stem barks (AGB)

Root barks (AGR)

 

MIC

MBC

MIC

MBC

MIC

MBC

MIC

MBC

MIC

MBC

MIC

MBC

MIC

MBC

MIC

MBC

E. coli

                

ATCC8739

64

512

16

256

512

-

64

256

64

256

1024

-

256

1024

2

32

ATCC10536

64

512

32

256

512

1024

32

128

64

256

1024

-

512

512

1

32

AG100

-

-

1024

 

-

-

1024

-

512

-

-

-

512

1024

8

128

AG100A

128

512

64

256

512

512

128

512

128

512

-

-

512

1024

0.5

64

AG100ATet

1024

-

512

-

-

-

1024

-

1024

-

-

-

1024

-

64

256

AG102

1024

-

1024

-

-

-

1024

-

1024

-

-

-

1024

-

32

>256

MC4100

256

512

128

1024

512

-

256

512

512

-

1024

-

256

1024

32

>256

W3110

256

-

256

512

512

1024

64

512

256

1024

-

-

512

1024

8

128

E. aerogenes

                

ATCC13048

128

1024

16

128

256

1024

32

512

32

512

1024

-

1024

-

8

64

CM64

-

-

1024

-

-

-

-

 

-

 

-

-

1024

-

>256

>256

EA27

512

1024

128

512

512

-

128

512

128

512

-

-

1024

1024

64

256

EA3

1024

-

-

-

1024

-

512

-

512

-

-

-

1024

-

128

>256

EA289

1024

-

1024

-

-

-

-

-

1024

-

-

-

1024

-

128

>256

EA298

1024

-

-

-

-

 

-

-

-

-

-

-

1024

-

64

>256

EA294

128

256

64

512

256

1024

64

512

128

1024

1024

-

128

512

16

64

E. cloacae

                

ECCI69

-

-

1024

-

-

-

-

-

1024

-

-

-

-

-

>256

>256

BM47

-

-

1024

-

-

-

1024

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

>256

>256

BM67

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1024

-

>256

>256

K. pneumoniae

                

ATCC11296

128

1024

16

128

256

1024

32

256

32

256

1024

-

512

1024

4

32

KP55

64

256

64

256

1024

-

256

1024

64

512

-

-

512

1024

64

256

KP63

128

256

64

256

256

1024

128

512

128

256

-

-

512

-

64

256

K24

-

-

1024

 

-

 

1024

-

1024

-

-

-

1024

-

32

256

K2

128

1024

32

128

512

1024

128

256

64

256

-

-

256

1024

16

256

P. stuartii

                

ATCC29916

64

512

16

128

256

512

128

512

64

256

-

-

512

512

8

128

NEA16

1024

-

1024

-

-

 

-

-

-

-

-

-

1024

-

64

256

PS2636

32

512

64

128

512

-

256

256

128

512

-

-

512

-

32

256

PS299645

128

1024

128

-

128

512

256

512

128

512

-

-

512

512

32

256

P. aeruginosa

                

PA01

512

1024

512

512

512

 

512

1024

512

-

1024

-

512

1024

32

256

PA124

-

-

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

-

-

-

1024

-

64

>256

- - : MIC and MBC not detected at up to 1024 μg/mL, Values in bold represent significant antibacterial activity of the plant extract

Antibacterial activity of the extracts in the presence of an Efflux Pumps Inhibitors

In the present work, extracts were combined with PAβN; However, no significant increase of the activities of the tested plant extracts was generally observed. Only AGL showed 4 times decrease of MICs against E. coli AG102 and E. cloacae BM67. In contrast, PAβN significantly improved the activity of the reference drug, CHL (more than 16 times) on MDR bacteria used (Table 5).
Table 5

MIC of the samples in the absence and presence of PAβN on the selected MDR bacterial species

MDR Bacteria used

Samples and MIC (μg/mL)

Allanblackia gabonensis

Gladiolus quartinianus (GQW)

Combretum molle (CML)

chloramphenicol

Flowers (AGFl)

Fruits (AGF)

Leaves (AGL)

Stem bark (AGB)

Root barks (AGR)

Alone

+ PAβN

alone

+ PAβN

Alone

+ PAβN

alone

+ PAβN

Alone

+ PAβN

Alone

+ PAβN

Alone

+ PAβN

Alone

+ PAβN

E. coli

                

AG100ATet

1024

1024

1024

512

-

-

1024

1024

1024

1024

-

-

1024

1024

64

≤2

AG102

1024

1024

1024

512

-

512

1024

1024

124

1024

-

-

1024

1024

32

≤2

E. aerogenes

                

CM64

-

-

1024

1024

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1024

1024

256

16

EA289

1024

1024

1024

1024

-

1024

-

-

1024

1024

-

-

1024

512

128

8

E. cloacae

                

ECCI69

-

-

1024

1024

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

>256

128

BM67

-

1024

-

-

-

512

-

-

-

-

-

-

1024

1024

>256

32

K. pneumoniae

                

K24

-

1024

1024

1024

-

-

1024

1024

1024

1024

-

-

1024

1024

32

2

P. stuartii

          

-

     

NEA16

-

-

1024

1024

-

-

-

1024

-

1024

-

-

1024

1024

64

8

P. aeruginosa

                

PA124

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1024

1024

64

8

Antibiotic resistance modifying activities of the plant extracts

Tables 2, 6 and 7 highlights the potentiating effects of the extracts on the activity of eight commonly used antibiotics. The most important modulating effects were observed of association CML with aminoglycosides (kanamycin and streptomycin), the potentiation effects varying from 77.78 to 88.89 % and from 66.67 to 77.78 % at MIC/2 and MIC/4 respectively; and with tetracycline (100 % and 77.78 % at MIC/2 and MIC/4 respectively) (Table 6). The modulating effects also ranged between 50 to 67 %, with the extract from A. gabonensis fruits (AGF) when combined at (MIC/2) with the some antibiotics. At MIC/4, AGF showed synergy less than 50 % on the tested bacteria with all antibiotics (Table 7). The most significant increases of antibiotic activity in the presence of plant extracts were noted with the association of streptomycin and CML and AGF on E. coli AG100ATet, with more than 128 fold and 64-fold decreases of MIC respectively. No increase of activity was noted with ampicillin, a β-lactamine when it was combined with plant extracts.
Table 6

Resistance modulating effect of the methanol leaves extract from Combretum molle at its sub-inhibitory concentrations on selected

Antibioticsa

Extract concentrations

MDR Bacteria used

% Modulating effectb

E. coli

E. aerogenes

K. pneumoniae

P. stuartii

P. aeruginosa

AG100

AG102

AG100Tet

CM64

EA289

EA298

K24

NEA16

PA124

AMP

0

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

 

MIC/2

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

0

MIC/4

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

0

CHL

0

8

32

64

256

128

64

64

64

64

 

MIC/2

8(1)

16 (2)

32(2)

256(1)

64(2)

8(8)

64(1)

16(4)

32(2)

66.65

MIC/4

8(1)

32(1)

64(1)

256(1)

64(2)

32(2)

64(1)

32(2)

32(2)

44.44

CIP

0

≤0.5

≤0.5

128

64

128

1

128

1

32

 

MIC/2

≤0.5(NA)

≤0.5

64(2)

64(1)

128(1)

1(1)

64(2)

1(1)

16(2)

33.33

MIC/4

≤0.5(NA)

≤0.5

64(2)

64(1)

128(1)

1(1)

64(2)

1(1)

16(2)

33.33

NFX

0

≤0.5

≤0.5

256

-

128

8

-

4

128

 

MIC/2

≤0.5(NA)

≤0.5

128(2)

64(>4)

128(1)

8(1)

-(NA)

4(1)

64(2)

33.33

MIC/4

≤0.5(NA)

≤0.5

256(1)

64(>4)

128(1)

8(1)

-(NA)

4(1)

64(2)

22.22

KAN

0

64

4

8

2

16

32

4

16

128

 

MIC/2

4(16)

4(1)

4(2)

≤0.5(>4)

2(8)

32(1)

2(2)

4(4)

64(2)

77.78

MIC/4

8(8)

4(1)

4(2)

1(2)

4(4)

32(1)

2(2)

8(2)

64(2)

77.78

STR

0

>64

-

-

4

16

32

4

32

64

 

MIC/2

>64(NA)

256 (≥2)

4(>64)

1(4)

4(4)

16(2)

1(4)

8(4)

32(2)

88.89

MIC/4

>64(NA)

-

128(>2)

2(2)

4(4)

32(1)

2(2)

16(2)

32(2)

66.67

ERY

0

32

64

-

-

64

16

128

16

128

 

MIC/2

8(4)

64(1)

256(>1)

-(NA)

64(1)

4(4)

128(1)

4(4)

64(2)

44.44

MIC/4

8(4)

64(1)

-(NA)

-(NA)

64(1)

16(1)

128(1)

8(2)

128(1)

22.22

TET

0

2

8

32

16

32

4

16

4

16

 

MIC/2

≤0.5(>4)

2(4)

8(4)

4(4)

8(4)

2(2)

8(2)

2(2)

4(4)

100

MIC/4

1(2)

8(1)

32(1)

8(2)

8(4)

2(2)

8(2)

2(2)

4(4)

77.78

a : Antibiotics (TET: tetracycline, KAN: kanamycin, STR: streptomycin, ERY: erythromycin, CHL: chloramphenicol, NFX: norfloxacin, CIP: ciprofloxacin, AMP: ampicillin; - : MIC not detected at up to 256 μg/mL; (): Modulation factor or gain of activity; b : Percentage of Antibiotic’s modulation Activity by the Plant extracts; Indications in bold represent the modulation factor ≥ 2, antibiotics having a percentage of modulating effect greather than 50 %; NA: Not applicable

Table 7

Resistance modulating effect of the Fruits methanol extract from Allanblackia gabonensis at its sub-inhibitory concentrations on selected MDR bacteria

Antibioticsa

Extract concentrations

MDR Bacteria used

% Modulating effectb

E. coli

E. aerogenes

K. pneumoniae

P. stuartii

P. aeruginosa

AG100

AG102

AG100ATet

CM64

EA289

EA298

K24

NEA16

PA124

AMP

0

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

 

MIC/2

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

0

MIC/4

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

-(NA)

0

CHL

0

8

32

64

256

128

64

64

64

64

 

MIC/2

8(1)

32(1)

64(1)

256(1)

128(1)

32(2)

32(2)

64(1)

32(2)

33.33

MIC/4

8(1)

32(1)

64(1)

256(1)

128(1)

64(1)

64(1)

64(1)

64(1)

0

CIP

0

≤0.5

≤0.5

128

64

128

1

128

1

32

 

MIC/2

≤0.5(NA)

≤0.5(NA)

64(2)

32(2)

128(1)

2(0.5)

128(1)

1(1)

32(1)

33.33

MIC/4

≤0.5(NA)

≤0.5(NA)

64(2)

64(1)

128(1)

2(0.5)

128(1)

1(1)

32(1)

11.11

NFX

0

≤0.5

≤0.5

256

-

128

8

-

4

128

 

MIC/2

1(≤0.5)

≤0.5(NA)

256(1)

128(>2)

128(1)

8(1)

-(NA)

4(1)

128(1)

11.11

MIC/4

1(≤0.5)

≤0.5(NA)

256(1)

-(NA)

128(1)

8(1)

-(NA)

4(1)

128(1)

0

KAN

0

64

4

8

2

16

32

4

16

128

 

MIC/2

2(32)

4(1)

2(4)

≤0.5(≥4)

1(16)

32(1)

2(2)

16(1)

64(2)

66.67

MIC/4

4(16)

4(1)

4(2)

2(1)

4(4)

32(1)

4(1)

16(1)

64(2)

44.44

STR

0

>64

-

-

4

16

32

4

32

64

 

MIC/2

>64(NA)

-(NA)

2(>128)

2(2)

2(8)

32(1)

4(1)

16(2)

32(2)

55.56

MIC/4

>64(NA)

-(NA)

8(>32)

2(2)

4(4)

32(1)

4(1)

32(1)

32(2)

44.44

ERY

0

32

64

-

-

64

16

128

16

128

 

MIC/2

16(2)

64(1)

256(>1)

-(NA)

64(1)

16(1)

128(1)

16(1)

128(1)

11.11

MIC/4

16(2)

64(1)

-(NA)

-(NA)

64(1)

16(1)

128(1)

16(1)

128(1)

0

TET

0

2

8

32

16

32

4

16

4

16

 

MIC/2

1(2)

4(2)

8(4)

4(4)

4(8)

4(1)

16(1)

2(2)

16(1)

66.67

MIC/4

1(2)

8(1)

8(4)

4(4)

8(4)

4(1)

16(1)

4(1)

16(1)

44.44

a : Antibiotics (TET: tetracycline, KAN: kanamycin, STR: streptomycin, ERY: erythromycin, CHL: chloramphenicol, NFX: norfloxacin, CIP: ciprofloxacin, AMP: ampicillin; - : MIC not detected at up to 256 μg/mL; (): Modulation factor or gain of activity; b : Percentage of antibiotic’s modulation activity by the Plant extracts; Indications in bold represent the modulation factor ≥ 2 and antibiotics having a percentage of modulating effect greather than 50 %; NA: Not applicable

Discussion

Medicinal plants are potential source of antimicrobial agents used in the treatment of infectious diseases [43, 44]. According to Kuete et al. [45, 46], the antibacterial activity of a plant extract is considered significant when the MICs are below 100 μg/mL, moderate when 100 ≤ MIC ≤ 625 μg/mL and weak when MIC are above 625 μg/mL. Consequently, the antibacterial activities of the tested extracts particularly those from A. gabonensis (AGF, AGR, AGB and AGFl) and C. molle (CML) were generally moderated (Table 4). Significant activities were recorded with AGF, AGR, AGB, and AGFl respectively on 37.93 %, 24.14 %, 20.70 % and 17.24 %. This highlights the good antibacterial potential of the tested extracts. The overall activity recorded with most of the studied extracts could be considered significant, especially those from A. gabonensis and C. molle [47]. When analyzing carefully the MIC and MBC results for the extract, it can be noted that MBC ≤ 4 were obtained with these samples on most of the tested bacterial species, suggesting their killing effects [48].

PAβN is a potent inhibitor of RND systems like AcrAB-TolC in Enterobacteriaceae or MexAB-OprM in P. aeruginosa used in the present work [49, 50]; The activity observed when chloramphenicol was tested in the presence of PAβN increased significantly, confirming that the tested bacteria are good models of efflux pumps-expressing bacteria.

Reversal of multi-drug resistance appears today as another attempt to mitigate the spread of resistance in bacteria. In recent years, many plants extracts and secondary metabolites have been evaluated as modulators of the antibiotic activity in efflux pumps in MDR bacteria [911, 37, 5154]. Herein, we demonstrated that a beneficial effect of the combination of the extracts from the leaves of C. molle (CML) and fruits of A. gabonensis (AGF) with CHL, KAN and STR could be achieved. Synergistic or modulating effects of the plant extracts particularly C. molle extract with antibiotics were noted on more than 70 % of the tested MDR bacteria, suggesting that some of their constituents can act as efflux pump inhibitors [51]. These constituents might act by blocking the efflux pumps located in the cell membrane in the tested bacteria, preventing the extrusion of antibiotics in the cytoplasm and therefore restoring their activity as observed in this study [55, 56]. This is the first time to report the potential of the studied extracts, particularly those from the leaves of C. molle (CML) and the fruits of A. gabonensis (AGF) to reverse antibiotic resistance in MDR bacteria.

Conclusion

This study provides informative data on the antimicrobial potential of the tested plant extracts and suggests that extracts from Allanblackia gabonensis could be a source of natural antibacterial products whilst Combretum molle leaves extract could contain both antibacterial substances and antibiotic-modulation agents. These data indicate that these plants can be used to fight bacterial infections and especially those involving MDR phenotypes.

Declarations

Acknowledgements

Authors are thankful to the Cameroon National Herbarium for identification of plants.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Biochemistry, Faculty of science, University of Dschang

References

  1. Sharma R, Sharma CL, Kapoor B. Antibacterial resistance: current problems and possible solutions. Indian J Med Res. 2005;59(3):120–9.Google Scholar
  2. Gangoue-Pieboji J, Bedenic B, Koulla-Shiro S, Randegger C, Adiogo D, Ngassam P, et al. Extended-spectrum-beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae in Yaounde, Cameroon. J Clin Microbiol. 2005;43:3273–7.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Davin-Regli A, Bolla JM, James CE, Lavigne JP, Chevalier J, Garnotel E, et al. Membrane permeability and regulation of drug “influx and efflux” in enterobacterial pathogens. Curr Drug Targets. 2008;9:750–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Pagès JM, Alibert-Franco S, Mahamoud A, Bolla JM, Davin-Regli A, Chevalier J, et al. Efflux pumps of gram-negative bacteria, a new target for new molecules. Curr Top Med Chem. 2010;8:1848–57.Google Scholar
  5. Nikaido H, Pagès JM. Broad specificity efflux pumps and their role in multidrug resistance of gram negative bacteria. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2012;36(2):340–63.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Lomovskaya O, Watkins W. “Inhibition of efflux pumps as a novel approach to combat drug resistance in bacteria.”. J Mol Microbiol Biotechnol. 2001;3(2):225–36.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Cowan MM. Plant products as antimicrobial agents. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1999;12:564–82.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Newman JD, Cragg GM. Natural products as sources of new drugs over the 30 years from 1981 to 2010. J Nat Prod. 2012;75(3):311–35.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Stermitz F, Lorenz P, Tawara JN, Zenewicz LA, Lewis K. Synergism in a medicinal plant: antimicrobial action of berberine potentiated by S-methoxyhydrocarpin-a multidrug pump inhibitor. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2000;97(4):1433–7.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Gibbons S. Plants as a source of bacterial resistance modulators and anti-infective agents. Phytochem Rev. 2005;4(1):63–78.Google Scholar
  11. Bama SS, Kingsley SJ, Anan S, Bama P. Antibacterial activity of different phytochemical extracts from the leaves of T. procumbens: Identification and mode of action of the terpeniod compounds as antibacterials. Int J Pharm Pharma Sci. 2012;4(1):557–64.Google Scholar
  12. Fankam A, Kuiate J-R, Kuete V. Antibacterial activities of Beilschmiedia obscura and six other Cameroonian medicinal plants against multi-drug resistant Gram-negative phenotypes. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2014;14:241.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Raponda-Walker A, Sillans R. Les plantes utiles du Gabon. Paris, France: Paul Lechevalier; 1976.Google Scholar
  14. Ymele EV, Dongmo AB, Dimo T. “Analgesic and anti-inlammatory efect of aqueous extract of the stem bark of Allanblackia gabonensis (Guttiferae)”. Inflammopharmacology. 2013;21(1):21–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Kuete V, Efferth T. Pharmacogenomics of Cameroonian traditional herbal medicine for cancer therapy. J Ethnopharmacol. 2011;137:752–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Kuete V, Fankam AG, Wiench B, Efferth T. Cytotoxicity and modes of action of the methanol extracts of six cameroonian medicinal plants against multidrug-resistant tumor cells. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2013;2013:10 pages.Google Scholar
  17. Nguedia JCA, Etoa FX, Beng VP, Lontsi D, Kuete V, Moyou RS. Anti-candidal property and acute toxicity of Gladiolus gregasius Baker (Iridaceae). Pharm Méd Trad Afr. 2004;13:149–59.Google Scholar
  18. Ameh SJ, Obodozie OO, Olorunfemi PO, Okoliko IE, Ochekpe NA. Potentials of Gladiolus corms as an antimicrobial agent in food processing and traditional medicine. J Microbiol Antimicrob. 2011;3(1):8–12.Google Scholar
  19. Bessong PO, Obi CL, Igumbor E, Andreola M-L, Litvak S. In vitro activity of three selected South African medicinal plants against human immunodeficiency virus type-1 reverse transcriptase. Afr J Biotechnol. 2004;3:555–9.Google Scholar
  20. Fyhrquist P, Mwasumbi L, Haeggstro CA, Vuorela H, Hiltunen R, Vuorela P. Ethnobotanical and antimicrobial investigation on some species of Terminalia and Combretum (Combretaceae) growing in Tanzania. J Ethnopharmacol. 2002;79:169–77.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Ojewole JAO. Analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects of mollic acid glucoside, a 1a- hydroxycycloartenoid saponin extractive from Combretum molle R. Br. ex G. Don (Combretaceae) leaf. Phytother Res. 2008;22:30–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Bussmann RW, Gilbreath GG, Soilo J, Lutura M, Lutuluo R, Kunguru K, et al. Plant use of the Massai of Sekenani Valley, Massai Mara, Kenya. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2006;2:22.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Grønhaug TE, Glæserud S, Skogsrud M, Ballo N, Bah S, Diallo D, et al. Ethnopharmacological survey of six medicinal plants from Mali, West Africa. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2008;4:26.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Ponou BK, Barboni L, Teponno RB, Mbiantcha M, Nguelefack TB, Park HJ, et al. Polyhydroxyoleanane-type triterpenoids from Combretum molle and their anti-inflammatory activity. Phytochem Lett. 2008;1:183–7.Google Scholar
  25. Eloff JN. A sensitive and quick microplate method to determine the minimal inhibitory concentration of plant extracts for bacteria. Planta Med. 1998;64:711–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Njume C, Afolayan AJ, Samie A, Ndip RN. Inhibitory and bactericidal potential of crude acetone extracts of combretum molle (combretaceae) on drug-resistant strains of Helicobacter pylori. J Health Popul Nutr. 2011;29(5):438–45.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Nyenje ME, Ndip RN. Bioactivity of the acetone extract of the stem bark of Combretum molle on selected bacterial pathogens: Preliminary phytochemical screening. J Med Plants Res. 2012;6(8):1476–81.Google Scholar
  28. Asres K, Bucar F, Edelsbrunner S, Kartnig T, Höger G, Thiel W. Investigations on antimycobacterial activity of some Ethiopian medicinal plants. Phytother Res. 2001;15:323–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Masoko P, Picard J, Eloff JN. The antifungal activity of twenty-four Southern African Combretum species (Combretaceae). South Afr J Bot. 2007;73:173–83.Google Scholar
  30. Asres K, Balcha F. Phytochemical screening and in vitro antimalarial activity of the stem bark of Combretum molle R. Br ex G Don Ethiopian Pharm J. 1998;16:25–33.Google Scholar
  31. Ademola IO, Eloff JN. In vitro anthelmintic activity of Combretum molle (R. Br. ex G. Don) (Combretaceae) against Haemonchus contortus ova and larvae. Vet Parasitol. 2010;169:198–203.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Fyhrquist P, Mwasumbi L, Vuorela P, Vuorela H, Hiltunen R, Murphy C, et al. Preliminary antiproliferative effects of some species of Terminalia, Combretum and Pteleopsis collected in Tanzania on some human cancer cell lines. Fitoterapia. 2006;77:358–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Yéo D, Koffi E, Bidié AP, Tako NA, Bahi C, Méité S, et al. In vitro anticholinesterase and inhibitory effects of the aqueous extract of Combretum molle (combretaceae) leaf on rabbit breathing. Trop J Pharm Res. 2010;9:469–73.Google Scholar
  34. Ojewole JAO. Cardiovascular effects of mollic acid glucoside, a 1alpha-hydroxycycloartenoid saponin extractive from Combretum molle R Br. ex G. Don (Combretaceae) leaf. Cardiovasc J Afr. 2008;19:128–34.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  35. Ojewole JAO, Adewole SO. Hypoglycaemic effect of mollic acid glucoside, a 1a-hydroxycycloartenoid saponin extractive from Combretum molle R. Br. ex G. Don (Combretaceae) leaf, in rodents. J Nat Med. 2009;63:117–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Asres K, Bucar F. Anti-HIV activity against immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-I) and type II (HIV-II) of compounds isolated from the stem bark of Combretum molle. Ethiop Med J. 2005;43:15–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Fankam A, Kuete V, Voukeng KI, Kuiate J-R, Pages J-M. Antibacterial activities of selected Cameroonian spices and their synergistic effects with antibiotics against multidrug-resistant phenotypes. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2011;11:104.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  38. Harbone JB. Phytochemical methods: a guide to modern techniques of plant analysis. London: Chapman & Hall; 1973.Google Scholar
  39. Mativandlela SPN, Lall N, Meyer JJM. Antibacterial, antifungal and antitubercular activity of Pelargonium reniforme (CURT) and Pelargonium sidoides (DC) (Geraniaceae) root extracts. S Afr J Bot. 2006;72:232–7.Google Scholar
  40. Zgoda JR, Porter JR. A convenient microdilution method screening natural products against bacteria and fungi. Pharmaceut Biol. 2001;39:221–5.Google Scholar
  41. Ghisalberti D, Masi M, Pagès J-M, Chevalier J. Chloramphenicol and expression of multidrug efflux pump in Enterobacter aerogenes. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2005;328:1113–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Stavri M, Piddock LJV, Gibbons S. Bacterial efflux pumps 1inhibitors from natural sources. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2007;59:1247–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Butler MS, Buss AD. Natural products—the future scaffolds for novel antibiotics? Biochem Pharmacol. 2006;71(7):919–29.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Kuete V. Medicinal Plant Research in Africa. In: Kuete V, editor. Pharmacology and chemistry. Oxford: Elsevier; 2013.Google Scholar
  45. Rios JL, Recio MC. Medicinal plants and antimicrobial activity. J Ethnopharmacol. 2005;100:80–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Kuete V. Potential of cameroonian plants and derived products against microbial infections: a review. Planta Med. 2010;76:1479–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Simões M, Bennett RN, Rosa EA. Understanding antimicrobial activities of phytochemicals against multidrug resistant bacteria and biofilms. Nat Prod Rep. 2009;26:746–57.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Carbonnelle B, Denis F, Marmonier A, Pinon G, Vague R. Bactériologie médicale: Techniques usuelles. Paris: SIMEP; 1987.Google Scholar
  49. Lomovskaya O, Bostian KA. Practical applications and feasibility of efflux pump inhibitors in the clinic–a vision for applied use. Biochem Pharmacol. 2006;71:910–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Lorenzi V, Muselli A, Bernardini AF, Berti L, Pagès JM, Amaral L, et al. Geraniol restores antibiotic activities against multidrug-resistant isolate from Gram-negative species. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009;53:2209–11.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  51. Braga LC, Leite AAM, Xavier KGS, Takahashi JA, Bemquerer MP, Chartone-Souza E, et al. Synergic interaction between pomegranate extract and antibiotics against Staphylococcus aureus. Can J Microbiol. 2005;51:541–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Figueredo FG, Ferreira EO, Lucena BFF, Torres CMG, Lucetti DL, Lucetti ECP, et al. Modulation of the Antibiotic Activity by Extracts from Amburana cearensis A. C. Smith and Anadenanthera macrocarpa (Benth.) Brenan. Biomed Res Int. 2013;2013:640682.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Tankeo SB, Lacmata ST, Noumedem JAK, Dzoyem JP, Kuiate JR, Kuete V. Antibacterial and antibiotic-potentiation activities of some Cameroonian food plants against multi-drug resistant gram-negative bacteria. Chin J Integr Med. 2014;20(7):546–54.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Bolla J, Alibert-Franco S, Handzlik J, Chevalier J, Mahamoud A, Boyer G, et al. Strategies for bypassing the membrane barrier in multidrug resistant Gram-negative bacteria. FEBS Lett. 2011;585:1682–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Kuete V, Alibert-Franco S, Eyong KO, Ngameni B, Folefoc GN, Nguemeving JR, et al. Natural products against bacteria expressing multidrug resistant phenotype. Int J Antimicrob Ag. 2011;37:156–61.Google Scholar
  56. Kuete V, Ngameni B, Tangmouo JG, Bolla J-M, Alibert-Franco S, Ngadjui BT, et al. Efflux pumps are involved in the Gram negative bacterial defense against isobavachalcone and diospyrone, two natural products. Antimicrob Ag Chemother. 2010;2010(54):1749–52.Google Scholar

Copyright

© Fankam et al. 2015

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Advertisement