The controlled in vitro susceptibility of gastrointestinal pathogens to the antibacterial effect of manuka honey
- 488 Downloads
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.
KeywordsAntibacterial Activity Minimum Inhibitory Concentration Minimum Bactericidal Concentration Honey Sample Inoculum Density
We thank the staff of Waikato Hospital, Medlab and Pathlab, Hamilton, New Zealand for the provision of the bacterial cultures.
- 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.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.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.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
- 17.R Development Core Team (2008) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, AustriaGoogle Scholar
- 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
- 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
- 33.Cooper R, Molan P, White R (2009) Honey in modern wound management. Wounds UK Publishing, AberdeenGoogle Scholar