In vitro antibacterial and early stage biofilm inhibitory potential of an edible chitosan and its phenolic conjugates against Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Listeria monocytogenes
In the present study, the antibacterial potential of chitosan grafted with phenolics (CPCs) such as caffeic acid (CCA), ferulic (CFA), and sinapic acid (CSA) were evaluated against foodborne pathogens like Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA) and Listeria monocytogenes (LM). The geometric means of minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC range 0.05–0.33 mg/ml), bactericidal concentration (MBC range 0.30–0.45 mg/ml), biofilm inhibitory concentration (BIC range 0.42–0.83 mg/ml), and biofilm eradication concentration (BEC range 1.71–3.70 mg/ml) of CPCs were found to be lower than the MIC (0.12–1.08 mg/ml), MBC (0.17–1.84 mg/ml), BIC (4.0–4.50 mg/ml), and BEC (17.4–23.0 mg/ml) of unmodified chitosan against PA and LM. CPCs attenuated the biofilms of PA and LM by increasing the membrane permeability of bacteria embedded within the biofilms. Further, sub MIC of CPCs (0.5 × MIC) significantly reduced the biofilm adhesion (p < 0.001) by representative strains of LM (CCA: 72.2 ± 3.5, CFA: 79.3 ± 0.9, and CSA: 74.9 ± 1.5%) and PA (CCA: 64 ± 1.1, CFA: 67.8 ± 0.8, and CSA: 65.7 ± 4.9%). These results suggested the antibacterial and anti-biofilm potential of CPCs that can be exploited to control foodborne pathogenic infections.
KeywordsAntibiofilm activity Biofilm-forming bacteria Chitosan-phenolic conjugates Foodborne pathogenic bacteria
The authors would like to thank National Culture Collection for Pathogens, Gyeongsang National University Hospital Branch of (GNUH-NCCP) for supply of pathogens.
This research was supported by Marine Biotechnology Program funded by Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries, Republic of Korea (Grant number 20150220).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this manuscript.
- Chatterjee NS, Panda SK, Navita M, Asha KK, Anandan R, Mathew S (2015) Vanillic acid and coumaric acid grafted chitosan derivatives: improved grafting ratio and potential application in functional food. J Food Sci Technol 52:7153–7162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-015-1874-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Condell O, Iversen C, Cooney S, Power KA, Walsh C, Burgess C, Fannings S (2012) Efficacy of biocides used in the modern food industry to control Salmonella enterica, and links between biocide tolerance and resistance to clinically relevant antimicrobial compounds. Appl Environ Microbiol 78:3087–3097. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.07534-11 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Eom SH, Kang SK, Lee DS, Myeong JI, Lee J, Kim HW, Kim KH, Je JY, Jung WK, Kim YM (2016) Synergistic antimicrobial effect and antimicrobial mode of action of chitosan-ferulic acid conjugate against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J Microbiol Biotechnol 26:784–789. https://doi.org/10.4014/jmb.1511.11046 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Martinez LR, Mihu MR, Tar M, Cordero RJB, Han G, Friedman AJ, Friedman JM, Nosanchuck JD (2010) Demonstration of anti biofilm and antifungal efficacy of chitosan against candida biofilms, using an in vivo central venus catheter model. J Infect Dis 201:1436–1440. https://doi.org/10.1086/651558 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS) (2003) Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically. NCCLS document M7-A6, 6th edn. NCCLS, WayneGoogle Scholar
- Nostro A, Roccaro AS, Bisignano G, Marino A, Canatelli MA, Pizzimenti FS, Cioni PL, Procopio F, Blanko AR (2007) Effects of oregano, carvacrol, and thyme on Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilms. J Med Microbiol 56:519–523. https://doi.org/10.1099/jmm.0.46804-0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Ong TH, Chitra E, Ramamurthy S, Siddalingam RP, Yuen KH, Ambu SP, Davamani F (2017) Chitosan-propolis nanoparticle formulation demonstrates anti-bacterial activity against Enterococcus faecalis biofilms. PloS One 12(4):e0176629. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174888 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Rinaudo M (2006) Chitin and chitosan: properties and applications. Prog Polym Sci 31:603–632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2006.06.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Song K (2013) An in vitro study of the anti-biofilm properties of proanthocyanidins and chitosan in Pseudomonas syringae pv. Papulans. Dissertation, Stony Brooke UniversityGoogle Scholar
- Thaya R, Vaseeharan B, Sivakamavalli J, Iswarys A, Govindarajan M, Alherbi NS, Kadaikunnan S, Al-anbr MN, Khaled JM, Banelli G (2018) Synthesis of chitosan-alginate microspheres with high antimicrobial and antibiofilm activity against multidrug resistant microbial pathogens. Microb Pathog 114:17–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micpath.2017.11.011 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Xie J, Yang L, Peters BM, Chen L, Chen D, Li B, Li L, Yu G, Xu Z, Shirtliff ME (2017) A 16-year retrospective surveillance report on the pathogenic features and antimicrobial susceptibility of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates from FAHJU in Guangzhou representative of Southern China. Microb Pathog 110:37–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micpath.2017.06.018 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Zhang H, Jung J, Zhao Y (2016) Partial characterization of preparation, characterization and evaluation of antibacterial activity of catechins and catechins-Zn complex loaded β-chitosan nanoparticles of different particle sizes. Carbohydr polym 137:82–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2015.10.036 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar