Indonesian Mirabilis jalapa Linn.: A Pharmacognostical and Preliminary Phytochemical Investigations

Wright, Lee, Jean Arnold, Shalom, White, Greene, and Cock: GC-MS analysis of Tasmannia lanceolata extracts which inhibit the growth of the pathogenic bacterium Clostridium perfringens



Clostridium perfringens is an endospore-forming Gram-positive, obligate anaerobic bacterium that is found in a variety of habitats, including soils, sewage or as a naturally occurring inhabitant of the intestinal microflora of humans.1 It is classed as an opportunistic pathogen and is an etiological agent of clostridial gastroenteritis as well as several other diseases including myonecrosis.2 The species C. perfringens is divided into five type strains (A-E), each capable of producing exotoxins that are linked to different illnesses of varying severity. These can range from mild food-poisoning to the potentially fatal clostridial myonecrosis (gas gangrene).3

Clostridial myonecrosis is a rapidly progressive infection of the soft tissue. The disease is characterised by the necrosis of local muscle and surrounding tissue and can lead to shock and ultimately death, even when promptly treated.1 Although several Clostridium spp. can cause gas gangrene, C. perfringens is the primary bacterium responsible for the disease (along with C. bifermentans, C. fallax, C. histolyticum, C. novyi, C. septicum and C. tertium), accounting for up to 80% of all recorded cases.4 The primary methods of treatment are through prompt antibiotic therapy and surgery, however combining these with hyperbaric oxygen can slow the spread of gas gangrene in patients. The strictly anaerobic nature of C. perfringens means that when exposed to oxygen, cellular replication and exotoxin production can be inhibited. However, this method of treatment is bacteriostatic and thus must be combined with antibiotic chemotherapy.5 Traditional antibiotic therapies offer an effective means of treatment; however, the probing of natural compounds offers an innovative means of treatment and lowers the inherent risk of antibiotic resistance of C. perfringens.

Tasmannia lanceolata (Poir.) A.C.Sm (commonly referred to as Tasmanian pepper or mountain pepper berry) is a shrub endemic to the woodlands and cool temperate rainforests of Tasmania and the south-eastern region of the Australian mainland.6 It is a medium to large shrub that varies between 2-5 m in height. Individual plants are unisexual, having either male or female flowers. The stems, branches and twigs are red in colour. The aromatic leaves are lanceolate to narrowly elliptical in shape (4-12 cm long, 0.7-2 cm wide) with a distinctly pale under surface. Small creamy-white unisexual flowers appear during the summer months. These develop into small fleshy black 2 lobed berries (5-8 mm wide) during autumn.

The berries, leaves and bark of this species have historical uses as a food and as a medicinal plant.6, 7 When the berry is air dried, it forms a small, hard peppercorn which is suitable for milling or crushing. The berry has a pleasant spicy flavour and sharp aroma. T. lanceolata was used as flavouring agent by Australian Aborigines and more recently by European settlers. Historically, the leaves have been used as an herb and the berries have been used as a spice. Australian Aborigines also used T. lanceolata as a therapeutic agent to treat stomach disorders and as an emetic, as well as general usage as a tonic.7 T. lanceolata was also used traditionally for the treatment and cure of skin disorders, venereal diseases, colic, stomach aches and as a quinine substitute.7 Later, European colonists also recognized the therapeutic potential of T. lanceolata and the bark was used as a common substitute for other herbal remedies (including those derived from the related South American Winteraceae species, Drimys wintera (winter bark)7 to treat scurvy due to its high anti-antioxidant content.7, 8

Despite its ethnobotanical usage, there have been limited rigorous scientific studies into the therapeutic properties of T. lanceolata. Recent studies have demonstrated the high antioxidant content of T. lanceolata fruit and leaves.8 It has been postulated that this high anti-oxidant content may provide therapeutic effects for this plant.7 Indeed, studies within our laboratory have reported potent inhibition of bacterial growth by T. lanceolata berries, leaves and peppercorns against panels of pathogenic and food spoilage bacteria.9 T. lanceolata extracts can also inhibit the growth of a bacterial trigger of rheumatoid arthritis (P. mirabilis).10

However, despite the documented ability of T. lanceolata to inhibit the growth of many bacterial species, to our knowledge there have been no similar studies against Clostridium perfringens. The current study was undertaken to test T. lanceolata berry and leaf extracts for the ability to inhibit the growth of this pathogen.


T. lanceolata samples and extraction

Dried Tasmannia lanceolata (Poir.) A.C.Sm berry (without seed) and leaf materials were obtained from Go Wild Harvest, Australia. The material was thoroughly dried using a Sunbeam food dehydrator and stored at -30°C until use. The dried plant materials were thawed and freshly ground to a coarse powder prior to extraction. Individual 1 g quantities were extracted by weighing each powdered plant part into each of 5 tubes and adding 50 mL of methanol, water, ethyl acetate, chloroform or hexane respectively. All solvents were obtained from Ajax, Australia and were AR grade. The berry and leaf material was extracted in each solvent for 24 h at 4°C with gentle shaking. The extracts were filtered through filter paper (Whatman No. 54) under vacuum followed by drying by rotary evaporation in an Eppendorf concentrator 5301. The resultant dry extracts were weighed and redissolved in 10 mL deionised water (containing 1% DMSO).

Qualitative phytochemical studies

Phytochemical analysis of the extracts for the presence of alkaloids, anthraquinones, cardiac glycosides, flavonoids, phenolic compounds, phytosterols, saponins tannins and triterpenoids were conducted by previously described assays.11, 12

Antibacterial screening

Clinical Clostridium perfringens screening

A clinical strain of Clostridium perfringens was supplied by Ms. Jane Gifkins (Griffith University) and was originally isolated and verified by John Bates (Queensland Department of Health). Cultures were grown and maintained using a thioglycolate liquid media (Oxoid Ltd., Australia). All growth studies were performed using nutrient agar (Oxoid Ltd., Australia) under induced anaerobic conditions using anaerobic jars and AnaeroGen™ 3.5L atmospheric generation systems (Thermo Scientific) as previously described.[13] Incubation was at 30 °C and the stock culture was subcultured and maintained in thioglycolate liquid media at 4 °C.

Evaluation of antimicrobial activity

Antimicrobial activity of all plant extracts was determined using a modified disc diffusion assay.14, 15 Briefly, 100 μL of the test bacteria were grown in 10 mL of fresh nutrient broth media until they reached a count of ~108 cells/mL. A volume of 100 μL of bacterial suspension was spread onto nutrient agar plates and extracts were tested for antibacterial activity using 5 mm sterilised filter paper discs. Discs were infused with 10 μL of the test sample, allowed to dry and placed onto inoculated plates. The plates were allowed to stand at 4 °C for 2 h before incubation at 30 °C for 24 h. The diameters of the inhibition zones were measured in millimetres. All measurements were to the closest whole millimetre. Each assay was performed in at least triplicate. Mean values (± SEM) are reported in this study. Standard discs of penicillin (2 μg) and ampicillin (10 μg) were obtained from Oxoid Ltd., Australia and used as positive controls for antibacterial activity. Filter discs infused with 10 μL of distilled water were used as a negative control.

Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) determination

The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) of the extracts was determined as previously described.16, 17 Briefly, the plant extracts were diluted in deionised water and tested across a range of concentrations. Discs were infused with 10 μL of the extract dilutions, allowed to dry and placed onto inoculated plates. The assay was performed as outlined above and graphs of the zone of inhibition versus concentration were plotted. Linear regression was used to calculate the MIC values.

Toxicity screening
Reference toxin for toxicity screening

Potassium dichromate (K2Cr2O7) (AR grade, Chem-Supply, Australia) was prepared as a 4 mg/mL solution in distilled water and serially diluted in artificial seawater for use in the Artemia franciscana nauplii bioassay.

Artemia franciscana nauplii toxicity screening

Toxicity was tested using a modified Artemia franciscana nauplii lethality assay.18, 19 Briefly, 400 μL of seawater containing approximately 43 (mean 43.2, n = 155, SD 14.5) A. franciscana nauplii were added to wells of a 48 well plate and immediately used for bioassay. A volume of 400 μL of diluted plant extracts or the reference toxin were transferred to the wells and incubated at 25 ± 1 °C under artificial light (1000 Lux). A negative control (400 μL seawater) was run in triplicate for each plate. All treatments were performed in at least triplicate. The wells were checked at regular intervals and the number of dead counted. The nauplii were considered dead if no movement of the appendages was observed within 10 seconds. After 24 h all nauplii were sacrificed and counted to determine the total % mortality per well. The LC50 with 95% confidence limits was calculated using probit analysis.

Non-targeted GC-MS head space analysis

Separation and quantification of phytochemical components were performed using a Shimadzu GC-2010 plus (USA) linked to a Shimadzu MS TQ8040 (USA) mass selective detector system as previously described.20 Briefly, the system was equipped with a Shimadzu auto-sampler AOC-5000 plus (USA) fitted with a solid phase micro-extraction fibre (SPME) handling system utilising a Supelco (USA) divinyl benzene/carbowax/polydimethylsiloxane (DVB/CAR/PDMS). Chromatographic separation was accomplished using a 5% phenyl, 95% dimethylpolysiloxane (30 m × 0.25 mm id × 0.25 um) capillary column (Restek USA). Helium (99.999%) was employed as a carrier gas at a flow rate of 0.79 mL/min. The injector temperature was set at 230°C. Sampling utilised a SPME cycle which consisted of an agitation phase at 500 rpm for a period of 5 sec. The fibre was exposed to the sample for 10 min to allow for absorption and then desorbed in the injection port for 1 min at 250 °C. The initial column temperature was held at 30°C for 2 min, increased to 140 °C for 5 min, then increased to 270 °C over a period of 3 mins and held at that temperature for the duration of the analysis. The GC-MS interface was maintained at 200 °C with no signal acquired for a min after injection in split-less mode. The mass spectrometer was operated in the electron ionisation mode at 70 eV. The analytes were then recorded in total ion count (TIC) mode. The TIC was acquired after a min and for duration of 45 mins utilising a mass range of 45 - 450 m/z.

Statistical analysis

Data is expressed as the mean ± SEM of at least three independent experiments.


Extraction of 1 g of the T. lanceolata plant materials with various solvents yielded dried plant extracts ranging from 17 mg (T. lanceolata leaf ethyl acetate extract) to 171 mg (methanolic T. lanceolata fruit extract) (Table 1). Aqueous and methanolic extracts generally gave higher yields of dried extracted material compared to ethyl acetate extracts. The dried extracts were resuspended in 10 mL of deionised water (containing 1 % DMSO) resulting in the extract concentrations shown in Table 1.

Qualitative phytochemical studies showed little difference between the aqueous and methanolic extracts, however there were notable differences between these extracts and the ethyl acetate extracts. High levels of phenolics (both water soluble and insoluble) were extracted in the aqueous and methanolic samples. There were substantially lower levels detected in the corresponding ethyl acetate extracts. Similarly, there was a lower level of flavonoids detected in the ethyl acetate extracts than the corresponding aqueous and methanolic extracts. Triterpenes were detected in both methanolic and ethyl acetate extracts although they were absent in the aqueous extracts.

To measure the inhibitory activity of the crude plant extracts against C. perfringens, 10 μL aliquots of each extract were screened using a disc diffusion assay. The bacterial growth was inhibited by all of the 6 extracts tested (Figure 1). The methanolic berry extract was the most potent inhibitor of growth, with inhibition zones of 16.3 ± 0.3 mm. This compares favourably with the penicillin and ampicillin controls, which had inhibitory zones of 12.3 ± 0.3 mm and 13.0 ± 1.0 mm respectively. The aqueous and methanolic extracts showed greater zones of inhibition than the ethyl acetate extracts, with inhibitory zones ≥ 11 mm.

The antimicrobial efficacy was further quantified by determining the MIC values (Table 2). All the extracts were determined to be potent inhibitors of C. perfringens growth, with MIC <1000 μg/mL for all extracts except the aqueous leaf extract. Even that extract had a relatively low MIC (1255 μg/mL), indicating antibacterial efficacy. The T. lanceolata berry extracts were more potent inhibitors than were the corresponding leaf extracts. Indeed, a MIC of 65 μg/mL was determined for the methanolic T. lanceolata berry extract. This is particularly noteworthy as it equates to a mass of less than 0.7 μg infused into the disc (compared with 2 and 10 μg for the penicillin and ampicillin controls respectively).

Table 1

The mass of dried extracted material, the concentration after resuspension in deionised water and qualitative phytochemical screenings of the T. lanceolata extracts.

ExtractMass of Dried Extract (mg)Concentration of Resuspended Extract (mg/ mL)Total PhenolicsWater Soluble PhenolicsWater Insoluble PhenolicsCardiac GlycosidesSaponinsTriterpenesPhytosterolsAlkaloids (Mayer Test)Alkaloids (Wagner Test)FlavonoidsTanninsFree AnthraquinonesCombined Anthraquinones

+++ indicates a large response; ++ indicates a moderate response; + indicates a minor response; - indicates no response in the assay. BW = aqueous T. lanceolata berry extract; BM = methanolic T. lanceolata berry extract; BE = ethyl acetate T. lanceolata berry extract; LW = aqueous T. lanceolata leaf extract; LM = methanolic T. lanceolata leaf extract; LE = ethyl acetate T. lanceolata leaf extract.

Figure 1

Growth inhibitory activity of T. lanceolata extracts against th C. perfringens clinical isolate measured as zones of inhibition (mm). BW = aqueous T. lanceolata berry extract; BM = methanolic T. lanceolata berry extract; BE = ethyl acetate T. lanceolata berry extract; LW = aqueous T. lanceolata leaf extract; LM = methanolic T. lanceolata leaf extract; LE = ethyl acetate T. lanceolata leaf extract; PC = penicillin (2 μg); AMP = ampicillin (10 μg). Results are expressed as mean zones of inhibition ± SEM.

Figure 2

The lethality of the T. lanceolata extracts (2000 μg/mL) and the potassium dichromate control (1000 μg/mL) towards Artemia franciscana nauplii after 24 h exposure. BW = aqueous T. lanceolata berry extract; BM = methanolic T. lanceolata berry extract; BE = ethyl acetate T. lanceolata berry extract; LW = aqueous T. lanceolata leaf extract; LM = methanolic T. lanceolata leaf extract; LE = ethyl acetate T. lanceolata leaf extract; PC = potassium dichromate control; SW = artificial seawater control. Results are expressed as mean % mortality ± SEM.

Table 2

Minimum inhibitory concentration (μg/mL) of the plant extracts and LC50 values (μg/mL) in the Artemia nauplii bioassay.


Numbers indicate the mean MIC and LC50 values of triplicate determinations. - indicates no inhibition. BW = aqueous T. lanceolata berry extract; BM = methanolic T. lanceolata berry extract; BE = ethyl acetate T. lanceolata berry extract; LW= aqueous T. lanceolata leaf extract; LM = methanolic T. lanceolata leaf extract; LE = ethyl acetate T. lanceolata leaf extract; PC = potassium dichromate control; SW = artificial seawater negative control; ND = the indicated test was not performed.

All extracts were initially screened at 2000 μg/mL in the assay (Figure 2). For comparison, the reference toxin potassium dichromate (1000 μg/mL) was also tested in the bioassay. The potassium dichromate reference toxin was rapid in its onset, promoting nauplii death within the first 3 h of exposure with 100 % mortality evident following 4-5 h (unpublished results). Similarly, all the T. lanceolata extracts displayed significant mortality rates following 24 h exposure (>50%).

Figure 3

Head space gas chromatograms of 0.5 μL injections of T. lanceolata berry (a) aqueous, (b) methanolic and (c) ethyl acetate extracts. The extracts were dried and resuspended in methanol. Chromatography conditions were as described in the methods section.

Table 3

Qualitative GC-MS headspace analysis of the T. lanceolata berry extracts, elucidation of empirical formulas and putative identification of each compound.

Molecular MassMolecular FormulaR.TimeNameMWE
110C6 H6 O210.19Acetylfuran + 
151C8 H9 NO210.375Methyl N-hydroxybenzenecarboximidoate  +
128C6 HI6 O10.552,4,4-trimethyl-cyclopentanol+  
130C7 H14 O210.765Methyl caproate+  
130C6 H18 O10.8924-Methyl-4-heptanol + 
170C12 H2610.9353,8-Dimethyldecane++ 
128C6 H16 O11.184-Methyl-2-heptanone+++
126C9 H1811.7211,1,3,4-Tetramethylcyclopentane+++
156C10 H20 O11.8052,2,5,5-Tetramethyl-3-hexanone  +
110C6 H6 O211.872-Formyl-5-methylfuran + 
120C9 H1211.993p-Ethylmethylbenzene+  
120C9 H1212.12m-Ethyltoluene   
156C10 H20 O12.299Decanal+ +
154C10 H18 O12.282,2,6-Trimethyl-6-vinyltetrahydropyran + 
114C8 H1812.5022,4-Dimethylhexane++ 
186C9 H14 O412.535alpha.-D-Xylo-Hex-5-enofuranose, 5,6-dideoxy-1,2-O-(1-methylethylidene)-  +
284C16 H28 O412.626Succinic acid, 2-methylpent-3-yl trans-he+ +
126C8 H14 O12.726-Methyl-5-hepten-2-one+++
146C7 H14 O312.773Methyl 2-hydroxy-4-methylpentanoate+  
170C12 H2613.229Dodecane+++
128C8 H16 O13.235Octanal   
142C10 H2213.533,3,5-Trimethylheptane++ 
170C12 H2613.6963,4,5,6-Tetramethyloctane++ 
120C9 H1213.868Cumene+++
140C9 H16 O13.94Ethanone, 1-(2,2-dimethylcyclopentyl)-  +
142C10 H2213.9663,3-Dimethyloctane++ 
154C10 H18 O14.135Cineole++ 
140C9 H16 O14.211,1,3-Trimethyl-2-cyclohexanone ++
136C10 H1614.404alpha.-Pinene+  
136C10 H1614.735.beta.-Ocimene+  
244C13 H24 O414.847Oxalic acid, isohexyl neopentyl ester++ 
278C14 H30 O3 S14.995Sulfurous acid, nonyl pentyl ester++ 
114C8 H1815.0813,3-Dimethylhexane++ 
120C8 H8 O15.15Bicyclo[4.2.0]octa-l,3,5-trien-7-ol  +
242C13 H22 O415.463Ethyl 2-(5-methyl-5-vinyltetrahydrofuran-2-yl)propan-2-yl carbonate++ 
212C14 H12 O215.615m-Toluic acid, phenyl ester ++
134C10 H1415.622m-Cymene+  
200C13 H28 O15.74411-Methyldodecanol++ 
134C10 H1415.8351,2-Dimethyl-4-ethylbenzene+++
170C10 H18 O215.956Linalool oxide+++
172C10 H20 O216.0513-(Hydroxymethyl)-2-nonanone+  
228C13 H24 O316.23Carbonic acid, nonyl prop-1-en-2-yl ester + 
154C10 H18 O16.351Linalool+++
170C12 H2616.4684-Methylundecane+++
140C10 H2016.5441-Ethyl-1,4-dimethylcyclohexane++ 
156C11 H2416.6366-Ethyl-2-methyloctane+  
134C10 H1416.7863,7,7-Trimethyl-1,3,5-cycloheptatriene++ 
134C10 H1416.913p-Cymene+++
156C10 H20 O17.2331-Methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)cyclohexanol++ 
156C10 H20 O17.402Neoisocarquejanol+  
152C10 H16 O17.4914(10)-Tujen-3-ol++ 
184C11 H20 O217.562,2,6,6-Tetramethyl-3,5-heptanedione+++
166C12 H2218.0361-Hexyl-1-cyclohexene+  
154C10 H18 O18.327cis-2-Norbornanol+ +
144C8 H16 O218.47Octanoic acid  +
170C10 H10 O218.565trans-Linalool 3,7-oxide+  
168C12 H2418.6634,6,8-Trimethyl-1-nonene++ 
130C6 H18 O18.9132,5-Dimethyl-2-hexanol++ 
154C10 H18 O19.05.alpha.-Terpineol+++
152C10 H16 O19.283Myrtenol++ 
156C10 H20 O19.5595-Methyl-3-propyl-2-hexanone++ 
134C9 H10 O19.6952-methyl-2-phenyl-oxirane+++
156C11 H2419.8032,3,7-Trimethyloctane++ 
184C13 H2820.0324,8-dimethyl-undecane++ 
196C12 H20 O220.155Nerol acetate+  
184C13 H2820.4453,3,5-trimethyl-decane++ 
252C17 H32 O20.67513-Heptadecyn-1-ol + 
296C20 H40 O20.683Phytol+  
232C15 H20 O220.7842,2,3,3-Tetramethylcyclopropanecarboxylic acid, 4-methylphenyl ester++ 
184C13 H2821.0824-methyl-dodecane++ 
158C9 H18 O221.235Nonanoic acid+++
114C8 H1821.6983,3-Dimethylhexane++ 
188C10 H20 O321.83Butyl butoxyacetate+++
198C14 H3022.0834,6-Dimethyldodecane++ 
150C10 H14 O22.165(2E,3Z)-2-Ethylidene-6-methyl-3,5-heptadienal++ 
222C16 H3022.408(2-Cyclohexyl-1-methylpropyl)cyclohexane++ 
140C9 H16 O22.7082,3,4,5-Tetramethylcyclopent-2-en-1-ol+++
194C12 H18 O222.8762-Pinen-10-ol, acetate+  
212C15 H3222.9552,6,11-Trimethyldodecane+++
158C10 H22 O23.2152-Propyl-1-heptanol + 
168C12 H2423.4734-Methyl-1-undecene+  
286C16 H30 O423.6192,2,4-Trimethyl-1,3-pentanediol diisobutyrate $$ Propanoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2,2-dimethyl-1-(1-methylethyl)-1,3-propanediyl ester++ 
164C10 H12 O223.686p-Eugenol+ +
180C10 H12 O324.01beta.-Phenyllactic acid methyl ester+  
216C12 H24 O324.17Propanoic acid, 2-methyl-, 3-hydroxy-2,2,4-trimethylpentyl ester+++
241C13 H23 NO324.3054-t-Butyl-2-(1-methyl-2-nitroethyl)cyclohexanone ++
204C15 H2424.344.alpha.-Cubebene+  
180C12 H20 O24.4564a,5-Dimethyloctahydro-2(1H)-naphthalenone+ +
210C14 H26 O24.68(6Z)-3,7-Dimethyl-6,11-dodecadien-1-ol+++
204C15 H2424.773Cyclohexane, 1-ethenyl-1-methyl-2,4-bis(1-methylethenyl)-, [1S-(1.alpha.,2. beta.,4.beta.)]-+  
204C15 H2425.34(-)-Aristolene+  
226C14 H26 O225.3852,4,7,9-Tetramethyl-5-decyne-4,7-diol  +
204C15 H2425.636Caryophyllene+  
202C15 H2225.887(3R,4aS,8aS)-8a-Methyl-5-methylene-3-(prop-1-en-2-yl)-1,2,3,4,4a,5,6,8a-octahydronaphthalene+  
204C15 H2426.114Zingiberene+  
204C15 H2426.228.alpha.-Guaiene+  
220C15 H24 O26.75(1R,2R,4S,6S,7S,8S)-8-Isopropyl-1-methyl-3-methylenetricyclo[,7] decan-4-ol+  
166C11 H18 O26.78Homomyrtenol  +
204C15 H2427.021Aromandendrene+  
204C15 H2427.45Guaia-6,9-diene+  
166C10 H14 O227.572Cyclopentaneacetaldehyde, 2-formyl-3-methyl-.alpha.-methylene-+ +
202C15 H2227.75Curcumene+ +
154C10 H18 O28.013Isogeraniol+++
220C15 H24 O28.174(2S,3S,6S)-6-Isopropyl-3-methyl-2-(prop-1-en-2-yl)-3-vinylcyclohexanone+  
204C15 H2428.5084,5-di-epi-aristolochene+  
202C15 H2228.689(3R,4aS,8aS)-8a-Methyl-5-methylene-3-(prop-1-en-2-yl)-1,2,3,4,4a,5,6,8a-octahydronaphthalene+  
206C14 H22 O28.8583,5-Di-tert-butylphenol+++
166C10 H14 O229.4552-(1-Formylvinyl)-5-methylcyclopentanecarbaldehyde++ 
220C15 H24 O29.465Caryophyllene oxide+++
334C22 H38 O230.136Undec-10-ynoic acid, undec-2-en-1-yl ester+++
222C15 H26 O30.361Cubenol++ 
264C17 H28 O230.811Nerolidyl acetate+  
222C15 H26 O30.984Ledol+  
302C20 H30 O231.235cis-5,8,11,14,17-Eicosapentaenoic acid ++
220C15 H24 O31.2551H-Cycloprop[e]azulen-7-ol, decahydro-1,1,7-trimethyl-4-methylene-, [1ar-(1a.alpha.,4a.alpha.,7.beta.,7a.beta.,7b.alpha.)]-+  
328C22 H32 O231.405cis-4,7,10,13,16,19-Docosahexanoic acid ++
220C15 H24 O31.4252-((2R,4aR,8aS)-4a-Methyl-8-methylenedecahydronaphthalen-2-yl)prop-2-en-1-ol+  
208C15 H2831.657Selinan+ +
222C15 H26 O31.79Guaiol+  
360C24 H40 O231.905Undec-10-ynoic acid, tridec-2-yn-1-yl ester++ 
252C17 H32 O32.31314-Methyl-8-hexadecyn-1-ol+++
204C15 H2432.394Guaia-6,9-diene+++
220C15 H24 O32.569Dehydroxy-isocalamendiol++ 
222C15 H26 O32.595Guai-1(10)-en-11-ol  +
220C15 H24 O32.73(-)-Spathulenol+++
222C15 H26 O32.911-Naphthalenol, 1,2,3,4a,7,8,8a-octahy+  
222C15 H26 O33.0072-Naphthalenemethanol, decahydro-.alpha.,.alpha.,4a-trimethyl-8-methylene-, [2R-(2.alpha.,4a.alpha.,8a.beta.)]-+  
240C15 H28 O233.075Cryptomeridiol+  
152C10 H16 O33.2432,4,6-Trimethyl-3-cyclohexene-1-carboxaldehyde++ 
204C15 H2433.3551H-3a,7-Methanoazulene, 2,3,6,7,8,8a-hexahydro-1,4,9,9-tetramethyl-, (1.alpha.,3a.alpha.,7.alpha.,8a.beta.)-+  
168C11 H20 O33.867(2,2,6-Trimethyl-bicyclo[4.1.0]hept-1-yl)-methanol+ +
220C15 H24 O34.293Caryophyllene oxide+++
204C15 H2434.44Longicyclene+ +
222C15 H26 O34.5981H-Cycloprop[e]azulen-4-ol, decahydro-1,1,4,7-tetramethyl-, [ 1ar-( 1a. alpha.,4.alpha.,4a.beta.,7.alpha.,7a.beta.,7b.alpha.)]-+ +
238C15 H26 O234.75Isocalamenediol ++
220C15 H24 O34.857Longifolenealdehyde+  
218C15 H22 O34.925,6,6-Trimethyl-2-(3-methylbuta-1,3-dienyl)-3-oxatricyclo[,4)]octane  +
290C20 H34 O34.989Copalol++ 
222C15 H26 O35.145Drim-7-en-11-ol+ +
124C9 H1635.274(2E,4E)-6,6-Dimethyl-2,4-heptadiene+  
152C10 H16 O35.724trans-Verbenol+  
222C15 H26 O35.849Drimenol+ +
270C17 H34 O235.92Isopropyl myristate   
180C12 H20 O35.9612,2,6,8-Tetramethyl-7-oxatricyclo[,6)]nonane++ 
206C15 H2636.268Tricyclo[,9)]nonane, 2,2,5,5,8,8-hexamethyl-, (l.alpha.,6.beta.,7. alpha.,9.alpha.)-+  
278C16 H22 O436.47Diisobutyl phthalate  +
206C14 H22 O36.636Norpatchoulenol+ +
270C17 H34 O237.19Methyl 14-methylpentadecanoate+  
334C20 H30 O437.62Butyl octyl phthalate+ +
152C10 H16 O38.18cis-Chrysanthenol+ +
206C15 H2638.396Patchoulane++ 
280C18 H32 O239.042cis,cis-Linoleic acid+  
296C19 H36 O239.101Methyl elaidate+  
234C15 H22 O239.265Drinenin++ 
284C18 H36 O239.349Methyl isoheptadecanoate+  

+ indicates the presence of the listed compound in the indicated extract.

To further quantify the effect of toxin concentration on the induction of mortality, the extracts were serially diluted in artificial seawater to test across a range of concentrations in the Artemia nauplii bioassay. Table 2 shows the LC50 values of the extracts towards A. franciscana. LC50 values >1000 μg/mL towards Artemia nauplii have been defined as being nontoxic.21 Based on these results, all extracts tested were deemed nontoxic.

Optimised GC-MS parameters were developed and used to examine the T. lanceolata berry extracts. The resultant gas chromatograms are presented in Figure 3. Numerous overlapping peaks were evident in the aqueous berry extract chromatogram (Figure 3a). A total of 79 peaks were detected in the aqueous T. lanceolata berry extract, with the peak eluting at 20.9 min being the most prominent. Comparison with a phytochemical library putatively identified this peak as the sesquiterpenoid polygodial (Table 3). Numerous overlapping peaks were also evident throughout the chromatogram, with a broad range of retention times between 10-40 min. The presence of peaks throughout the chromatogram attest to the wide range of compounds of widely varying polarity extracted with water.

The methanolic berry extract GC-MS chromatogram (Figure 3b) was more complex than the aqueous extract chromatogram. Indeed, a total of 129 peaks were detected in this chromatogram, with major peaks at approximately 14.1, 15.1, 16.4, 19.1, 21.0, 31.3, 31.8 and 35.0 min. As for the aqueous extract, polygodial (eluting at approximately 21 min) was a major component. In addition, a further major peak was evident in the methanolic extract at approximately 16.5 min. A comparison the phytochemical database putatively identified this peak as linalool (Table 3). This compound was also present in the aqueous extract, albeit at a much lower level. Numerous overlapping peaks were also evident throughout the chromatogram, many at retention times corresponding to peaks in the aqueous extract. This indicates that methanol and water extracted many similar components, although many of the lower polarity compounds appear to be more effectively extracted into methanol than water Fewer peaks were evident in the ethyl acetate extract chromatogram (Figure 3c). Indeed, only 61 unique mass signals were detected in the ethyl acetate extract. As for the other extracts, polygodial was detected in the ethyl acetate berry extract, albeit in substantially lower levels. The ethyl acetate chromatogram also had a major peak present at 19.7 min, which was putatively identified as 2-methyl-2-phenyl-oxirane. Whilst this compound was also detected in both the aqueous and methanolic extracts it was only present in relative abundance in the ethyl acetate extract. Multiple other peaks were also noted in the ethyl acetate extract, many corresponding to peaks in the aqueous and methanolic extracts. However, several peaks in this extract were at different retention times than seen for the more polar methanolic and aqueous extracts.

In total, 156 unique mass signals were noted for the T. lanceolata berry extracts by GC-MS headspace analysis (Table 3). Empirical formulas and putative identifications were achieved for these compounds by comparison against a GC-MS mass and spectral database. A noteable feature of the GC-MS analyses is the diversity of terpenoids compounds noted in the T. lanceolata extracts. The monoterpenoids linalool oxide (16 min), linalool (16.4 min), cymene (16.9 min), α-terpineol (19.1 min) and isogeraniol (28 min) as well as the sesquiterpenoids polygodial (21 min), caryophyllene oxide (29.5 and 34.3 min) guania-6,9-diene (32.4 min), spathulenol (32.7 min) were present in all extracts. However, multiple other terpenoids were present in some but not all extracts. The sesquiterpenoid polygodial was present in all extracts (at approximately 21 min) as either the major peak, or one of the largest peaks. A further two sesquiterpenoids were also putatively identified as isomers of caryophyllene oxide. The GC-MS headspace analysis was unable to distinguish which of these isomers corresponded to each peak. One isomer was assumed to be caryophyllene oxide whilst the other compound was assumed to be the structural isomer humulene. Several aliphatic keto-compounds were also detected. Of these, 4-methyl-2-heptanone (11.2 min), 1,1,3,3-tetramethylcyclopentane (11.7 min), 6-methyl-5-hepten-2-one (12.7 min) and 2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-3,5-heptanedione (17.6 min) were present in all extracts. Similarly, the aliphatic compounds dodecane (13.2 min), 4-methylunadecane (16.5 min), nonanoic acid (21.2 min), butyl butoxyacetate (21.8 min), 2,6,11-trimethyldodecane (23 min), (6Z)-3,7-dimethyl-6,11-dodecadien-1-ol (24.7 min), undec-10-ynoic acid-undec-2-en-1-yl ester (30.1 min) and the aliphatic ester propanoic acid, 2-methyl-, 3-hydroxy-2,2,4-trimethylpentyl ester (24.2 min) were also present in all T. lanceolata berry extracts. Similarly, the benzene derivatives cumene (13.9 min), 1,2-dimethyl-4-ethylbenzene (15.8 min), 2-methyl-2-phenyl-oxirane (20 min) and 3,5-di-tert-butylphenol (28.9 min), were also present in all the berry extracts.


Whilst all the T. lanceolata extracts screened displayed potent C. perfringens growth inhibitory activity, the berry extracts generally had greater efficacy than the corresponding leaf extracts. Therefore, the berry extracts were further analysed to determine their phytochemical composition. An examination of the GC-MS headspace metabolomics profile analysis of the aqueous, methanolic, and ethyl acetate berry extracts highlights several interesting compounds. An obvious feature was the number and diversity of terpenoids present in all extracts. The monoterpoid α-terpineol, as well as the sequiterterpenoids polygodial and caryophyllene oxide, was prevalent in all T. lanceolata berry extracts. Indeed, polygodial was the major compound detected in the methanolic and aqueous extracts (based on peak area). This agrees with previous studies which frequently cite polygodial as a major component in T. lanceolata berries (6). Indeed, some studies have reported that polygodial may account for nearly 40 % of commercial T. lanceolata essential oil components.22

The bacterial growth inhibitory activity of polygodial has been reported in several studies. Polygodial isolated from Warburgia salutaris was reported to be a potent inhibitor of the growth of a panel of bacteria.23 Indeed, MIC’s of 12.5 μg/mL were reported for polygodial against Staphylococcus aureus and Bacillus subtilis in that study. Whilst less potent, the same study also reported good growth inhibition for polygodial against Staphylococcus epidermidis, Micrococcus luteus, Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae, with MIC values generally ≤100 μg/mL. Other studies have reported little or no antibacterial activity for polygodial against limited panels of bacteria, although many of these studies only tested at relatively low concentrations (100 μg/mL)).[24] In contrast, more recent studies have demonstrated good bactericidal activity against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria.25 Antifungal efficacy and mechanistic studies of polygodial have been more definitive, with several publications highlighting its potent fungicidal activity.24,26,27 Polygoidal appears to exert its antifungal activity by several mechanisms. It non-specifically disrupts/denatures fungal integral membrane proteins by functioning as a non-ionic surfactant.25 It also readily reacts with amino acids (especially cysteine and aromatic amino acids), resulting in further denaturation. As an additional antifungal mechanism, polygoidal may permeate cells by diffusing across the cell membrane. Once inside the cell, polygoidal interacts with various intracellular components and affects metabolic processes. It is possible that polygodial also interacts with bacterial cells in a similar way.

The monoterpene α-terpineol was also a common component across all T. lanceolata extracts. It is generally believed that monoterpenoids have the most potent broad spectrum bacterial inhibitory activity of all terpenoids compounds, and that this activity is closely linked to their lipophilic character.28 A variety of monoterpenoids including α-terpineol have been shown to have potent antibacterial activity against a panel of Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria.28,29 The small, hydrophobic nature of monoterpenoids allow them to insert into cytosolic membranes, altering the fluidity and permeability of the membrane, thereby changing the conformation and function of membrane proteins. This consequently interrupts crucial cellular processes including the respiratory chain. Furthermore, the cytoplasmic membrane comprises a cellular barrier to protons and larger ions.30 Interestingly, bacteria respond to monoterpenoid exposure by modulating membrane fluidity.31 Despite this, the specific antimicrobial mechanisms of monoterpenoids are not yet fully understood.

Interestingly, the non-specific growth inhibitory mechanism of monoterpenoids is inherently difficult for bacteria to counteract/develop resistance to. Indeed, to the best of our knowledge, no bacteria have yet developed resistance to any monoterpenoid. Furthermore, as monoterpenoids are generally used in mixtures (extracts, essential oils), it is likely that several growth inhibitory compounds, perhaps with multiple growth inhibitory mechanisms, are used concurrently. This not only enhances the antibacterial efficacy, but also greatly decreases the likelihood of bacteria developing resistance.

A number of other terpenoids were also detected in the T. lanceolata berry extracts by GC-MS headspace analysis. Monoterpenoids were particularly prevalent, with 2,2,6-trimethyl-6-vinyltetrahydropyran (geraniol, Figure 4a), cineole (Figure 4b), α-pinene (Figure 4c), β-ocimene (Figure 4d), cymene (Figure 4e), linalool oxide (Figure 4f), linalool (Figure 4g), dihydro-γ-terpineol (Figure 4h), 4(10)-thujen-3-ol (sabinol) (Figure 4i), trans-linalool-3,7-oxide (Figure 4j), myrtenol (Figure 4k), p-eugenol (Figure 4l), homomyrtenol (Figure 4m), aromandendrene (Figure 4n) and isogeraniol (Figure 4o) detected in the T. lanceolata berry extracts. The bacterial growth inhibitory properties of many of these monoterpenoids have been extensively documented. One study reported noteworthy antibacterial activity for multiple monoterpenoids including α-terpineol, geraniol, cineole, α-pinene, linalool, sabinene and eugenol against an extended panel of bacteria.32 Both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria were susceptible, although the susceptibility varied widely between bacterial species. Unfortunately, that study did not report MIC values, making it difficult to compare efficacies with other compounds in other studies. However, the study was particularly interesting as the authors correlated the inhibitory activity of the monoterpenoids with their structures:

  • Generally, terpenoids with a phenolic structure are more highly active than non-phenolic terpenoids.

  • The presence of a hydroxyl group further enhances the potency of the terpenoids.

  • The position of the hydroxyl group also influences the growth inhibitory potency of the terpenoids.

  • Alkyl substitutions reduce the surface tension, altering polarity and subsequently altering bacterial selectivity.

  • The addition of an acetate moiety further enhances antibacterial efficacy.

  • When aldehyde or alcohol moieties are present, the bactericidal activity is increased substantially, possibly via protein degradation, solvating or dehydrating effects.

Similarly, other studies have also reported good antibacterial activity for other monoterpenoids. Eugenol causes bacterial cell wall degradation.33 Cymene induces swelling of the cytoplasmic membrane, resulting in bacterial death.34 Carvone dissipates the transmembrane pH gradient and cell potential, thus disrupting general metabolic function.35 Cinnamaldehyde is a potent inhibitor of E. coli and Salmonella typhimurium growth.36 It is believed that the cinnamaldehyde carbonyl group has affinity for bacterial decarboxylases, preventing their function.37

Several sesquiterpenoids including α-cubenene (Figure 5a), caryophyllene (Figure 5b), zingiberene (Figure 5c), α-guaiene (Figure 5d), cubenol (Figure 5e), ledol (Figure 5f), spathulenol (Figure 5g), guaiol (Figure 5h), guai-1(10)-en-11-ol (Figure 5i), longicyclene (Figure 5j), isocalamenediol (Figure 5k), longifolenealdehyde (Figure 5l) were also present in the T. lanceolata berry extracts. The potent antibacterial activity of sesquiterpenoid lactones isolated from red algae (Laurencia spp.) has been reported, with MIC values 10-40 μg/mL against Chromobacterium violaceum, Erwinia spp., two Proteus species. and two Vibrio species.[38] Whilst less potent, good growth inhibitory activity has also been reported for selina-4,11(13)-dien-3-on-12-oic acid isolated from Varthemia iphionoides against Bacillus cereus, B. subtilis, E. coli, Micrococcus luteus, Salmonella enteritides and S. aureus.39 However, the sesquiterpenoids are generally considered to be less potent bacterial growth inhibitors than the monoterpenoids.38 Instead, the sesquiterpenoids appear to exert their antibacterial activities through interactions with other phytochemicals. The sesquiterpenoids nerolidol, farnesol, bisabolol and apritone have been reported to enhance the susceptibility of bacteria to other antibiotic compounds, possibly by increasing the permeability of the bacterial membrane to those compounds.40 Thus, as well as having moderate growth inhibitory activity themselves, it is likely that the T. lanceolata sesquiterpenoids enhance the activity of the other antibacterial compounds in the extracts. Whilst reports of antibacterial activity are lacking for many of the other sesquiterpenoids, some have been identified in bacterial growth inhibitory plant extracts.41-45

Figure 4

Monoterpenoid components which were detected in the T. lanceolata berry extracts by GC-MS headspace analysis: (a) geraniol, (b), cineole (c), α-pinene, (d) β-ocimene, (e) p-cymene, (f) linalool oxide, (g) linalool, (h) dihydro-γ-terpineol, (i) sabinol, (j) trans-linalool-3,7-oxide, (k) myrtenol, (l) p-eugenol, (m) homomyrtenol, (n) aromandendrene and (o) isogeraniol.

Figure 5

Sesquiterpenoid components detected in the T. lanceolata berry extracts by GC-MS headspace analysis: (a) α-cubenene, (b) caryophyllene, (c) zingiberene, (d) α-guaiene, (e) cubenol, (f) ledol, (g) spathulenol, (h) guaiol, (i) guai-1(10)-en-11-ol, (j) longicyclene, (k) isocalamenediol and (l) longifolenealdehyde.


Our study demonstrates that T. lanceolata berry extracts contain a variety of different compounds which may contribute to the C. perfringens growth inhibitory activity. Furthermore, a comparison between the metabolomics profiles of the extracts has highlighted several compounds of interest. However, it is unlikely that any single molecule is solely responsible for the T. lanceolata berry C. perfringens growth inhibitory activity. Instead, it is more likely that several compounds contribute to this activity. Furthermore, it is possible that synergistic interactions between the various bioactive components may be potentiating the growth inhibitory activity of the individual components, increasing their efficacy. At the very least, the presence of numerous molecules with growth inhibitory activity indicates that these extracts are likely to function by pluripotent pathways. Further studies are warranted to test the activity of the phytochemical compounds, both individually and in combinations.




  • T. lanceolata berry and leaf extracts were potent inhibitors of C. perfringens growth (MIC values generally <1000 μg/mL).

  • T. lanceolata berry extracts were particularly potent with MICs of 654, 65 and 329 μg/mL for the aqueous, methanolic and ethyl acetate extracts respectively.

  • The aqueous, methanolic and ethyl acetate leaf extracts were also good growth inhibitors, with MICs of 839, 1255 and 625 μg/mL respectively.

  • All T. lanceolata extracts were non-toxic in the Artemia nauplii assay.

  • GC-MS metabolomic profiling of the berry extracts highlighted a diversity of terpenoids compounds.


We are grateful to Jane Gifkins and John Bates for the gift of the C. perfringens clinical strain used in these studies. Financial support for this work was provided by the Environmental Futures Research Institute and the School of Natural Sciences, Griffith University, Australia.



Dr. Mitchell Henry Wright is a postdoctoral researcher at Oregon Health & Science University in Portland, Oregon (USA) where he works on investigating Mn(III) transformations in aquatic systems. Specifically, his research focuses on manganese oxidation/reduction by bacteria and how these organisms influence the geochemical cycling of the metal. His previous postdoctoral posting involved investigating the potential of Australian native plants in the treatment and prevention ofvarious pathogenic bacteria. This has resulted in several publications between both disciplines.


Mr. Cameron Jay Lee completed his Bachelor of Science with Honours in 2016 and is currently beginning his PhD. His research involves the investigation of thermophilic anaerobes that utilize toxic metals in anaerobic respiration (including uranium and arsenic). He has extensive experience in anaerobic cultivation/isolation andin numerous analytical techniques associated with heavy metal analysis.


Ms. Megan Sarah Jean Arnold is currently undertaking her PhD in Tropical Parasitology at Griffith University’s EskitisInstitute for Drug Discovery with a focus on the identification and development of novel chemoprophylactic agents for malaria. Her other research interests include investigating Australian high antioxidant plants for theirantibacterial capabilities.


Dr. Anthony Carlson Greene is a senior lecturer and researcher at Griffith University, Brisbane Australia. He obtained his PhD in Microbiology from the University of New South Wales and focuses on extreme environments, Bioremediation and Geomicrobiology. His specific interests include the microbial ecology of thermophilic, saline and alkaliphilic environments and the mechanisms and industrial potential of extremophilic bacteria contained therein.


Dr Ian Edwin Cock leads a research team in the Environmental Futures Research Institute and the School of Natural Sciences at Griffith University, Australia. His research involves bioactivity and phytochemical studies into a variety of plant species of both Australian and international origin, including Aloe vera, South Asian and South American tropical fruits, as well as Australia plants including Scaevolaspinescens, Pittosporum phylliraeoides,Terminalia ferdinandiana (Kakadu plum), Australian Acacias, Syzygiums, Petalostigmas and Xanthorrhoea johnsonii (grass trees). This range of projects has resulted in nearly 200 scientific publications in a variety of international peer reviewed journals.


[4] Conflicts of interest CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.



Dimethyl sulfoxide


The concentration required to achieve 50 % mortality


Minimum inhibitory concentration



Stevens DL, Bryant AE , authors. The role of clostridial toxins in the pathogenesis of gas gangrene. Clin Infect Dis. 2002. 35(Suppl 1):p. S93–100. DOI: 10.1086/341928.


Tanaka D, Isobe J, Hosorogi S, Kimata K, Shimizu M, Katori K, et al. , authors. An outbreak of food-borne gastroenteritis caused by Clostridium perfringens carrying the cpe gene on a plasmid. Jpn J Infect Dis. 2003;56(3):137–9. [12944687]


Freedman JC, Theoret JR, Wisniewski JA, Uzal FA, Rood JI, McClane BA , authors. Clostridium perfringens type A–E toxin plasmids. Res Microbiol. 2015;166(4):264–79. 10.1016/j.resmic.2014.09.004. [25283728]PMC4383721


Aggelidakis J, Lasithiotakis K, Topalidou A, Kouroumpas J, Kouvidis G, Katonis P , authors. Limb salvage after gas gangrene: a case report and review of the literature. World J Emerg Surg. 2011. 6(1):p. 28 [21846405]PMC3182882


Bakker DJ , author. Clostridial myonecrosis (gas gangrene). Undersea Hyperb Med. 2012;39(3):731–7. [22670554]


Cock IE , author. The phytochemistry and chemotherapeutic potential of Tasmannia lanceolata (Tasmanian pepper): A review. Pharmacog Commn. 2013;3(4):13–25


Cock IE , author. Medicinal and aromatic plants – Australia. In Ethnopharmacology section, Biological, Physiological and Health Sciences 2011; Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS). Developed under the auspices of UNESCO, EOLSS Publishers; Oxford, UK: (


Netzel M, Netzel G, Tian Q, Schwartz S, Konczak I , authors. Native Australian fruits – a novel source of antioxidants for food. Innov Food Sci Emerg Technol. 2007;8(3):339–46. DOI: 10.1016/j.ifset.2007.03.007


Winnett V, Boyer H, Sirdaarta J, Cock IE , authors. The potential of Tasmannia lanceolata as a natural preservative and medicinal agent: antimicrobial activity and toxicity. Pharmacog Commn. 2014;4(1):42–52. DOI: 10.5530/pc.2014.1.7


Cock IE, Winnett V, Sirdaarta J, Matthews B , authors. The potential of selected Australian medicinal plants with anti-Proteus activity for the treatment and prevention of rheumatoid arthritis. Pharmacog Mag. 2015;42(Supp1):S190–208. DOI: 10.4103/0973-1296.157734


Lee CJ, Wright MH, Arnold MSJ, Greene AC, Cock IE , authors. Inhibition of Streptococcus pyogenes growth by native Australian plants; New approaches towards the management of impetigo, pharyngitis and rheumatic heart disease. Pharmacog Commn. 2016;6(3):164–73. DOI: 10.5530/pc.2016.3.6


Wright MH, Greene AC, Cock IE , authors. Inhibition of Bacillus anthracis growth by Australian native plants used traditionally as antibacterial medicines. Pharmacog J. 2015;7(6):389–96. DOI: 10.5530/pj.2015.6.13


Wright MH, Sirdaarta J, Matthews B, Greene AC, Cock IE , authors. Growth inhibitory activity of Kakadu plum extracts against the opportunistic pathogen Clostridium perfringens: New leads in the prevention and treatment of clostridial myonecrosis. Pharmacog J. 2016;8(2):144–53. DOI: 10.5530/pc.2016.2.7


Sirdaarta J, Matthews B, White A, Cock IE , authors. GC-MS and LC-MS analysis of Kakadu plum fruit extracts displaying inhibitory activity against microbial triggers of multiple sclerosis. Pharmacog Commn. 2015;5(2):100–15. DOI: 10.5530/pc.2015.2.2


Cock IE, van Vuuren SF , authors. The potential of selected South African plants with anti-Klebsiella activity for the treatment and prevention of ankylosing spondylitis. Inflammopharmacology. 2015;23(1):21–35. DOI: 10.1007/s10787-014-0222-z


Kalt FR, Cock IE , authors. Gas chromatography-mass spectroscopy analysis of bioactive Petalostigma extracts: Toxicity, antibacterial and antiviral activities. Pharmacog Mag. 2014;10(Suppl 1):S37–49. DOI: 10.4103/0973-1296.127338


Vesoul J, Cock IE , authors. The potential of Bunya Nut as an antibacterial food agent. Pharmacog Commn. 2012;2(1):72–79. DOI: 10.5530/pc.2012.1.13


Ruebhart D, Wickramasinghe W, Cock IE , authors. Protective efficacy of the antioxidants vitamin E and Trolox against Microcystis aeruginosa and microcystin-LR in Artemia franciscana nauplii. J Toxicol Environ Health, Part A. 2009;72(24):1567–75. DOI: 10.1080/15287390903232459


Wright MH, Lee CJ, Pollock CE, Greene AC, Cock IE , authors. Growth inhibitory activity of Kakadu Plum extracts against the opportunistic pathogen Clostridium perfringens;New leads in the prevention and treatment of clostridial myonecrosis. Pharmacog Commn. 2016;6(2):93–99. DOI: 10.5530/pj.2016.2.8


Biggs I, Sirdaarta J, White A, Cock IE , authors. GC-MS analysis of frankincense extracts which inhibit the growth of bacterial triggers of selected autoimmune diseases. Pharmacog Commn. 2016;6(1):10–22. DOI: 10.5530/pc.2016.1.3


Cock IE, Ruebhart DR , authors. Comparison of the brine shrimp nauplii bioassay and the ToxScreen-II test for the detection of toxicity associated with Aloe vera (Aloe barbadensis Miller) leaf extract. Pharmacog Res. 2009;1(2):98–101


Menary RC , author. Mountain pepper extract, Tasmannia lanceolata: quality stabilisation and registration. A report for the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation (RIRDC) Barton ACT. 2003. (


Rabe T, Van Staden J , authors. Isolation of an antibacterial sesquiterpenoid from Warburgia salutaris. J Ethnopharmacol. 2000;73(1):171–4. DOI: 10.1016/ S0378-8741(00)00293-2


Taniguchi M, Adachi T, Akihiko OSK, Shigeo K, Sachihiko I, Isao K , authors. Structure-activity relationship of the Warburgia sesquiterpene dialdehydes. Agric Biol Chem. 1984;48:73–8. DOI: 10.1271/bbb1961.48.73


Kubo I, Fujita K, Lee SH, Ha TJ , authors. Antibacterial activity of polygodial. Phytother Res. 2005. 19:p. 1013–7. [16372365]


Alves TM, Ribeiro FL, Kloos H, Zani CL , authors. Polygodial, the fungitoxic component from the Brazilian medicinal plant Polygonum punctatum. Mem Inst Owwaldo Cruz. 2001. 96(6):p. 831–3.


Lee SH, Lee JR, Lunde CS, Kubo I , authors. In vitro antifungal susceptibilities of Candida albicans and other fungal pathogens to polygodial, a drimane sesquiterpene dialdehyde. Planta Med. 1999;65(03):204–8. DOI: 10.1055/s-1999-13981


Paduch R, Kandefer-Szerszen M, Trytek M, Fiedurek J , authors. Terpenes: substances useful in human healthcare. Arch Immunol Ther Exp. 2007;55(5):315–27. DOI: 10.1007/s00005-007-0039-1


Zenegin H, Baysal AH , authors. Antibacterial and antioxidant activity of essential oil terpenes against pathogenic and spoilage-forming bacteria and cell structure-activity relationships evaluated by SEM microscopy. Molecules. 2014;19:17773–98. DOI: 10.3390/molecules191117773. [25372394]


Cristani M, D’Arrigo M, Mandalari G, Castelli F, Sarpietro MG, Micieli D , authors. Interaction of four monoterpenes contained in essential oils with model membranes: implications for their antibacterial activity. J Agric Food Chem. 2007. 55(15):p. 6300–8. [17602646]


Di Pasqua R, Hoskins N, Betts G, Mauriello G , authors. Changes in membrane fatty acid composition of microbial cells induced by addition of thymol, carvacrol, limonene, cinnamaldehyde, and eugenol in the growing media. J Agric Food Chem. 2006;54(7):2745–9. DOI: 10.1021/jf052722l. [16569070]


Dorman HJD, Deans SG , authors. Antimicrobial agents from plants: antibacterial activity of plant volatile oils. J Appl Microbiol. 2000;88(2):308–16. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2672.2000.00969.x


Thoroski J, Blank G, Bilideris C , authors. Eugenol induced inhibition of extracellular enzyme production by Bacillus cereus. J Food Prot. 1989;52(6):399–403. DOI: 10.4315/0362-028X-52.6.399


Ultee A, Bennink MHJ, Moezelaar R , authors. The phenolic hydroxyl group of carvacrol is essential for action against the food-borne pathogen Bacillus cereus. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2002;68(4):1561–8. DOI: 10.1128/AEM.68.4.1561-1568.2002. [11916669]PMC123826


Oosterhaven K, Poolman B, Smid EJ , authors. S-carvone as a natural potato sprout inhibiting, fungistatic and bacteriostatic compound. Ind Crops Prod. 1995;4(1):23–31. DOI: 10.1016/0926-6690(95)00007-Y


Helander IM, Alakomi HL, Latva-Kala K, Mattila-Sandholm T, Pol I, Smid EJ, Gorris LGM, von Wright A , authors. Characterization of the action of selected essential components on gram-negative bacteria. J Agric Food Chem. 1998;46(9):3590–5. DOI: 10.1021/jf980154m


Wendakoon CN, Sakaguchi M , authors. Inhibition of amino acid decarboxylase activity in Enterobacter aerogenes by active compounds in spices. J Food Prot. 1995;58(3):280–3. DOI: 10.4315/0362-028X-58.3.280


Vairappan CS, Suzuki M, Ishii T, Tatsufumi O, Tsuyoshi A, Michio M , authors. Antibacterial activity of halogenated sesquiterpenes from Malaysian Laurencia spp. Phytochemistry. 2008;69(13):2490–4. DOI: 10.1016/j.phytochem.2008.06.015. [18718619]


Al-Dabbas MM, Hashinaga F, Abdelgaleil SA, Suganuma T, Akiyama K, Hayashi H , authors. Antibacterial activity of an eudesmane sesquiterpene isolated from common Varthemia, Varthemia iphionoides. J Ethnopharmacol. 2005;97(2):237–40. DOI: 10.1016/j.jep.2004.11.007. [15707759]


Brem-Stecher B, Johnson EA , authors. Sensitisation of Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli to antibiotics by the sesquiterpenoids nerolidol, farnesol, bisabolol, and apritone. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2003;47(10):3357–60. DOI: 10.1128/AAC.47.10.3357-3360.2003


Goni P, López P, Sánchez C, Gómez-Lusa R, Becerrila R, Nerínb C , authors. Antimicrobial activity in the vapour phase of a combination of cinnamon and clove essential oils. Food Chem. 2009;116(4):982–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2009.03.058


Sabulal B, Dan M, Kurup R, Pradeep NS, Valsamma RK, George V , authors. Caryophyllene-rich rhizome oil of Zingiber nimmonii from South India: Chemical characterization and antimicrobial activity. Phytochemistry. 2006;67(22):2469–73. DOI: 10.1016/j.phytochem.2006.08.003. [16973189]


Malu SP, Obochi GO, Tawo EN, Nyong BE , authors. Antibacterial activity and medicinal properties of ginger (Zingiber officinale). Global J Pure Appl Sci. 2009;15(3):365–8. DOI: 10.4314/gjpas.v15i3-4.48561


Akin M, Aktumsek A, Nostro A , authors. Antibacterial activity and composition of the essential oils of Eucalyptus camaldulensis Dehn. and Myrtus communis L. growing in Northern Cyprus. Afr J Biotechnol. 2012;9(4):531–5


Tepe B, Daferera D, Sokmen A, Munevver S, Moschos P , authors. Antimicrobial and antioxidant activities of the essential oil and various extracts of Salvia tomentosa Miller (Lamiaceae). Food Chem. 2005;90(3):333–40. DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2003.09.013