Advertisement

The controlled in vitro susceptibility of gastrointestinal pathogens to the antibacterial effect of manuka honey

  • S. M. LinEmail author
  • P. C. Molan
  • R. T. Cursons
Article

Abstract

The susceptibility of common gastrointestinal bacteria against manuka honey with median level non-peroxide antibacterial activity (equivalent to that of 16.5% phenol) was investigated by determining the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC) using a standardized manuka honey with the broth microdilution method. The measured sensitivity of bacteria showed that manuka honey is significantly more effective than artificial honey (a mixture of sugars as in honey), indicating that osmolarity is not the only factor that is responsible for the antibacterial activity of the honey. Most tested gastrointestinal pathogens have MIC and MBC values in the range of 5–10% of honey, other than Enterobacter spp. which was in the range of 10–17%. The difference in efficacy between the honey with and without hydrogen peroxide removed was also studied, and it was found that both hydrogen peroxide and the non-peroxide components contribute to the bacteriostatic and bactericidal activity of the honey. It was also found that treatment against multi-antibiotic resistant microorganisms such as Salmonella typhimurium DT104 and ESBL-producing organisms with manuka honey may be promising.

Keywords

Antibacterial Activity Minimum Inhibitory Concentration Minimum Bactericidal Concentration Honey Sample Inoculum Density 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank the staff of Waikato Hospital, Medlab and Pathlab, Hamilton, New Zealand for the provision of the bacterial cultures.

References

  1. 1.
    Molan PC (2009) Honey: antimicrobial actions and role in disease management. In: Ahmad I, Aqil F (eds) New strategies combating bacterial infection. Wiley VCH, Weinheim, pp 229–253Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Badawy OFH, Shafii SSA, Tharwat EE, Kamal AM (2004) Antibacterial activity of bee honey and its therapeutic usefulness against Escherichia coli O157:H7 and Salmonella typhimurium infection. Rev Sci Tech Off Int Epizoot 23(3):1011–1022Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Molan PC (1992) The antibacterial activity of honey. 2. Variation in the potency of the antibacterial activity. Bee World 73(2):59–76Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Adebolu TT (2005) Effect of natural honey on local isolates of diarrhea-causing bacteria in southwestern Nigeria. Afr J Biotechnol 4(10):1172–1174Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Obi CL, Ugoji EO, Edun SA, Lawal SF, Anyiwo CE (1994) The antibacterial effect of honey on diarrhoea causing bacterial agents isolated in Lagos, Nigeria. Afr J Med Med Sci 23(3):257–260PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Allen KL, Molan PC, Reid GM (1991) A survey of the antibacterial activity of some New Zealand honeys. J Pharm Pharmacol 43(12):817–822PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Aldridge KE, Schiro DD (1994) Anaerobic susceptibility testing. Slight differences in inoculum size can make a difference in minimum inhibitory concentrations. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 18(3):191–195PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wiegand I, Burak S (2004) Effect of inoculum density on susceptibility of Plesiomonas shigelloides to cephalosporins. J Antimicrob Chemother 54:418–423PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chin JN, Rybak MJ, Cheung CM, Savage PB (2007) Antimicrobial activities of ceragenins against clinical isolates of resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 51(4):1268–1273PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Edwards R, Brown J, Greenwood D (1991) Turbidimetric study of the effect of inoculum density on the response of Escherichia coli to gentamicin under aerobic and anaerobic conditions. Chemotherapy 37(3):196–201PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Eng RH, Cherubin C, Smith SM, Buccini F (1985) Inoculum effect of beta-lactam antibiotics on Enterobacteriaceae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 28(5):601–606PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Udekwu KI, Parrish N, Ankomah P, Baquero F, Levin BR (2009) Functional relationship between bacterial cell density and the efficacy of antibiotics. J Atimicrobial Chemother 63:745–757CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Seneviratne CJ, Jin LJ, Samaranayake YH, Samaranayake LP (2008) Cell density and cell aging as factors modulating antifungal resistance of Candida albicans biofilms. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 52(9):3259–3266PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Snow MJ, Manley-Harris M (2004) On the nature of non-peroxide antibacterial activity in New Zealand manuka honey. Food Chem 84(1):145–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shannon IL, Edmonds EJ, Madsen KO (1979) Honey: sugar content and cariogenicity. ASDC J Dent Child 46(1):29–33PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lin SM, Molan PC, Cursons RT (2009) The in vitro susceptibility of Campylobacter spp. to the antibacterial effect of manuka honey. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 28:339–344PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    R Development Core Team (2008) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ethelberg S, Sørensen G, Kristensen B, Christensen K, Krusell L, Hempel-Jørgensen A, Perge A, Nielsen EM (2007) Outbreak with multi-resistant Salmonella Typhimurium DT104 linked to carpaccio, Denmark, 2005. Epidemiol Infect 135(6):900–907PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dechet AM, Scallan E, Gensheimer K, Hoekstra R, Gunderman-King J, Lockett J, Wrigley D, Chege W, Sobel J (2006) Outbreak of multidrug-resistant Salmonella enterica serotype Typhimurium definitive type 104 infection linked to commercial ground beef, northeastern United States, 2003-2004. Clin Infect Dis 42(6):747–752PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Notermans DW, van Pelt W, Kivi M, van de Giessen AW, Wannet WJ, Bosman A (2005) Sharp increase of infections with Salmonella serotype Typhimurium DT104 in the Netherlands. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 149(53):2992–2994PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sameshima T, Akiba M, Izumiya H, Terajima J, Tamura K, Watanabe H, Nakazawa M (2000) Salmonella typhimurium DT104 from livestock in Japan. Jpn J Infect Dis 53(1):15–16PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Paterson DL, Bonomo RA (2005) Extended-spectrum beta-lactamases: a clinical update. Clin Microbiol Rev 18(4):657–686PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cooper RA, Molan PC, Harding KG (1999) Antibacterial activity of honey against strains of Staphylococcus aureus from infected wounds. J R Soc Med 92(6):283–285PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cooper RA, Molan PC, Harding KG (2002) The sensitivity to honey of Gram-positive cocci of clinical significance isolated from wounds. J Appl Microbiol 93:857–863PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Natarajan S, Williamson D, Grey J, Harding KG, Cooper RA (2001) Healing of an MRSA-colonized, hydroxyurea-induced leg ulcer with honey. J Dermatol Treat 12:33–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bennett TI, Parkes T (1944) Penicillin in sulphonamide-resistant pneumonias. Lancet 246:305–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bondi A, Dietz CC (1945) Penicillin-resistant Staphylococci. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 60:55–58PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gallardo E (1945) Sensitivity of bacteria from infected wounds to penicillin: II Results in one hundred and twelve cases. War Medicine 7:100–103Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Al Somal N, Coley KE, Molan PC, Hancock BM (1994) Susceptibility of Helicobacter pylori to the antibacterial activity of manuka honey. J R Soc Med 87:9–12PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lusby PE, Coombes AL, Wilkinson JM (2005) Bactericidal activity of different honeys against pathogenic bacteria. Arch Med Res 36(5):464–467PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mundo MA, Padilla-Zakour OI, Worobo RW (2004) Growth inhibition of foodborne pathogens and food spoilage organisms by select raw honeys. Int J Food Microbiol 97(1):1–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    DeVito JA, Mills JA, Liu VG (2002) An array of target-specific screening strains for antibacterial discovery. Nat Biotechnol 20:478–483PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Cooper R, Molan P, White R (2009) Honey in modern wound management. Wounds UK Publishing, AberdeenGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Blair SE, Cokcetin NN, Harry EJ, Carter DA (2009) The unusual antibacterial activity of medical-grade Leptospermum honey: antibacterial spectrum, resistance and transcriptome analysis. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 28(10):1199–1208PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Honey Research Unit, Department of Biological SciencesUniversity of WaikatoHamiltonNew Zealand
  2. 2.Molecular Genetics Laboratory, Department of Biological SciencesUniversity of WaikatoHamiltonNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations