ANTIMICROBIAL ACTIVITY OF NONTRADITIONAL PLANT POLLEN AGAINST DIFFERENT SPECIES OF MICROORGANISMS

Authors

  • Miroslava Kačániová
  • Margarita Terentjeva
  • Jana Petrová
  • Lukáš Hleba
  • Tetiana Shevtsova
  • Maciej Kluz
  • Przemyslaw Rožek
  • Nenad Vukovič

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15414/jmbfs.2014.4.1.80-82

Keywords:

Nontraditional plant pollen, pathogenic bacteria, microscopic filamentous fungi, antimicrobial activity

Abstract

The aim of this study was to detect the antimicrobial activity of four plant pollen samples to pathogenic bacteria, microscopic fungi and yeasts. Pollens of dogwood common (Cornus mas), ray mountain (Secale strictum spp. strictum), pumpkin rape (Cucurbita pepo var. styriaca) and grape vine (Vitis vinifera) were collected in 2010 in Slovakia. The antimicrobial effects of the four nontraditional plant pollens were tested using the agar well diffusion method. For extraction, 70% ethanol (aqueous, v/v) was applied. Antimicrobial susceptibility of five different strains of bacteria - three gram positive (Listeria monocytogenes CCM 4699, Pseudomonas aeruginosa CCM 1960, Staphylococcus aureus CCM 3953) and gram negative (Salmonella enterica CCM 4420, Escherichia coli CCM 3988), as well as three different strains of microscopic fungi, Aspergillus fumigatus, Aspergillus flavus, Aspergillus niger, and three different strains of yeasts Candida albicans, Geotrichum candidum and Rhodotorula mucilaginosa, were examinated. L. monocytogenes was the most sensitive among bacteria to the three ethanol extracts of plant pollen after 24 hours of inoculation, A. flavus and C. albicans were the most sensitive microscopic fungi and yeast species, respectively.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2014-08-01

How to Cite

Kačániová, M., Terentjeva, M., Petrová, J., Hleba, L., Shevtsova, T., Kluz, M., Rožek, P., & Vukovič, N. (2014). ANTIMICROBIAL ACTIVITY OF NONTRADITIONAL PLANT POLLEN AGAINST DIFFERENT SPECIES OF MICROORGANISMS. Journal of Microbiology, Biotechnology and Food Sciences, 4(1), 80–82. https://doi.org/10.15414/jmbfs.2014.4.1.80-82

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >>