Evaluation of Common Antibacterial Screening Methods Utilized in Essential Oil Research
Abstract
The use of essential oils as therapeutic agents has become increasingly popular; however, research into the antimicrobial activity of these products has been hampered by the lack of standardized and reliable screening methods. The lack of standardized methods also makes direct comparison of results between studies impossible. In this study, the most commonly used antimicrobial assays cited in the literature were evaluated for reliability and their ability to accurately assess, and directly compare, essential oil antimicrobial activity. The methods used were disc diffusion, well diffusion, agar dilution and broth dilution. This study revealed that the disc diffusion, well diffusion and agar dilution methods were unreliable and produced inconsistent results. This was largely due to problems related to achieving stable dispersion of the oils in aqueous media, diffusion of lipophilic constituents in aqueous media and varying methods for determining numbers of viable bacteria remaining after the addition of the oil. An optimized broth dilution method, using 0.02% Tween 80 to emulsify the oils, was developed and shown to be the most accurate method for testing the antimicrobial activity of the hydrophobic and viscous essential oils. When evaluated against a range of oils, this method provided the most reliable and correct results and allowed direct comparison of the antibacterial activity of the test oils, irrespective of viscosity and hydrophobicity.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The lack of a linear correlation between the essential oil concentrations and growth inhibition of F. proliferatum in the disc diffusion bioassay could be explained by the fact that dilute essential oil diffused more easily in the agar medium than the undiluted or less dilute oil.
“This could explain the lack of a linear correlation between the essential oil concentrations and growth inhibition of F. proliferatum that was observed in the disc diffusion bioassay. Instances where more concentrated EO produce smaller inhibition zones in comparison to less concentrated oil have been reported in literature and are attributed to the fact that dilute EO diffused more easily in the”
From Antifungal Activity of Essential Oil of<i>Eucalyptus camaldulensis</i>Dehnh. against Selected<i>Fusarium</i>spp. (2017) · cites this paper as [37]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Swamy, M. K., Akhtar, M. S., & Sinniah, U. R. (2016) · Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine · doi:10.1155/2016/3012462 · Cited by 949 · see citing works
Gakuubi, M. M., Maina, A. W., & Wagacha, J. M. (2017) · International Journal of Microbiology · doi:10.1155/2017/8761610 · Cited by 162 · see citing works
- Authors
- Hood, J. R., Wilkinson, J. M., & Cavanagh, H. M. A.
- Affiliations
- Charles Sturt University (AU)
- Venue
- Journal of Essential Oil Research
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2003-11
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 428-433
- ISSN
- 1041-2905 (ISSN-L)
- 2163-8152
- OpenAlex
- W2081004192
- Cited by
- 145
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 9
- FWCI
- 3.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Essential Oil Research (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Essential Oils and Antimicrobial Activity
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Insect Pest Control Strategies
- Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Organic Chemistry › Antimicrobial agents and applications
- Keywords
- essential oils, antibacterial activity, broth dilution, disk diffusion, agar dilution, viscosity, method standardization, viable cell count
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review