In vitro effects on biofilm viability and antibacterial and antiadherent activities of silymarin
Language English Country United States Media print-electronic
Document type Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
- MeSH
- Anti-Bacterial Agents isolation & purification metabolism MeSH
- Bacterial Adhesion drug effects MeSH
- Biofilms drug effects MeSH
- Gram-Negative Bacteria drug effects physiology MeSH
- Gram-Positive Bacteria drug effects physiology MeSH
- Microbial Sensitivity Tests MeSH
- Microbial Viability drug effects MeSH
- Silybum marianum chemistry MeSH
- Silymarin isolation & purification metabolism MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
- Names of Substances
- Anti-Bacterial Agents MeSH
- Silymarin MeSH
Limited treatment options in infectious diseases caused by resistant microorganisms created the need to search new approaches. Several herbal extracts are studied for their enormous therapeutic potential. Silymarin extract, from Silybum marianum (milk thistle), is an old and a new remedy for this goal. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the antibacterial and antiadherent effects of silymarin besides biofilm viability activity on standard bacterial strains. Minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC), minimal bactericidal concentration (MBC), antiadherent/antibiofilm activity, and effects on biofilm viability of silymarin were evaluated against standard bacterial strains. MIC values were observed between 60 and >241 μg/mL (0.25->1 mmol/L). Gram-positive bacteria were inhibited at concentrations between 60 and 120 μg/mL. Gram-negative bacteria were not inhibited by the silymarin concentrations included in this study. MBC values for Gram-positive bacteria were greater than 241 μg/mL. Adherence/biofilm formations were decreased to 15 μg/mL silymarin concentration when compared with silymarin-untreated group. Silymarin reduced the biofilm viabilities to 13 and 46 % at 1 and 0.5 mmol/L concentrations, respectively. We demonstrated that silymarin shows antibacterial and antiadherent/antibiofilm activity against certain standard bacterial strains which may be beneficial when used as a dietary supplement or a drug.
See more in PubMed
Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol. 2013 Apr;112(4):251-6 PubMed
Mikrobiyol Bul. 2010 Apr;44(2):311-21 PubMed
Drug Metab Dispos. 2008 Jan;36(1):65-72 PubMed
N Engl J Med. 2009 Jun 25;360(26):2758-69 PubMed
Integr Cancer Ther. 2007 Jun;6(2):146-57 PubMed
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006 Jan;21(1 Pt 2):275-80 PubMed
Clin Infect Dis. 2001 Oct 15;33(8):1387-92 PubMed
Hepatology. 2010 Jun;51(6):1912-21 PubMed
Folia Microbiol (Praha). 2006;51(5):381-6 PubMed
Hepatology. 2000 Aug;32(2):442-4 PubMed
Pol J Microbiol. 2005;54(3):191-200 PubMed
Phytother Res. 2010 Oct;24(10):1423-32 PubMed
J Clin Microbiol. 1985 Dec;22(6):996-1006 PubMed
Clin Infect Dis. 2011 Apr 15;52(8):1038-45 PubMed
Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2014 Feb;15(1):1-7 PubMed
J Biotechnol. 2007 Jun 15;130(2):133-42 PubMed
Braz J Infect Dis. 2011 Jul-Aug;15(4):305-11 PubMed
Front Microbiol. 2012 Aug 06;3:283 PubMed
BMC Complement Altern Med. 2011 Jun 30;11:52 PubMed
Invest New Drugs. 2007 Apr;25(2):139-46 PubMed
J Microbiol Methods. 2010 Nov;83(2):89-105 PubMed
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2015 May;21 Suppl 1:S1-25 PubMed
Oncogene. 2003 Nov 13;22(51):8271-82 PubMed
Hepatology. 2013 Mar;57(3):1262-71 PubMed
Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2005 Nov;26(5):343-56 PubMed
Integr Cancer Ther. 2007 Jun;6(2):104-9 PubMed
J Clin Microbiol. 1999 Jun;37(6):1771-6 PubMed
J Microbiol Methods. 2000 Apr;40(2):175-9 PubMed
Can J Microbiol. 2012 Apr;58(4):448-54 PubMed
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2013 May;32(5):657-69 PubMed
APMIS Suppl. 2013 May;(136):1-51 PubMed
J Biomed Biotechnol. 2012;2012:618081 PubMed
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Mar 30;107(13):5995-9 PubMed
Food Chem Toxicol. 2008 Feb;46(2):446-75 PubMed
Biotechnol J. 2011 Nov;6(11):1397-408 PubMed
Arch Pharm Res. 2003 Aug;26(8):597-600 PubMed
Cancer Lett. 2008 Oct 8;269(2):352-62 PubMed
Methods Mol Biol. 2011;740:1-6 PubMed
