Cited by 21Essential Oils and Antimicrobial ActivityProbiotics and Fermented FoodsInsect Pest Control Strategies

Synergistic antifungal effects of thyme essential oil and Lactobacillus plantarum cell-free supernatant against Penicillium spp. and in situ effects

Open access
Sriwattanachai, Suphamid, Sadiq, Muhammad Bilal, Anal, Anil Kumar·2018·Journal of Food Processing and Preservation

Abstract

This study evaluates the synergistic antifungal effects between thyme essential oils and Lactobacillus plantarum cell-free supernatant (LCFS) against Penicillium spp. and in situ antifungal activity in rice grains. Thyme essential oil and LCFS showed remarkable antifungal activities against Penicillium spp. with the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of 40 and 80 µL/mL, respectively. The analysis of fractional inhibitory concentration (FIC) index showed the antifungal synergism between thyme essential oil and LCFS against Penicillium spp. with FIC index of 0.5. This synergism also resulted in fourfold reduction in their MICs when applied in combination. The antifungal modes of action were characterized by observing the changes in cell membrane permeability and degradation of fungal cell wall. The combination of thyme essential oil and LCFS (2 × MIC of each) showed remarkable in situ antifungal effect and completely inhibit the growth of Penicillium in rice seeds. The results suggested the possible applications of the observed synergism on actual crops. Practical applications Essential oils are used as preservative in food industry and high concentration of essential oil is associated with negative organoleptic characteristics. This study presented a novel approach for synergistic antifungal effects by using the combination of thyme essential oil and Lactobacillus plantarum cell-free supernatant (LCFS) against Penicillium spp. and systematic evaluation of the antifungal effect by using fractional inhibitory concentration (FIC) index method. This approach will be a role model for future research on synergism and overcome the major drawbacks of using live bacteria and the negative effects arising from antimicrobial activities of essential oils.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jfpp.13400

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sriwattanachai, S., Sadiq, M. B., & Anal, A. K.
Affiliations
Asian Institute of Technology (TH)
Corresponding author
Anal, Anil Kumar
Venue
Journal of Food Processing and Preservation
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-07-05
Volume
42
Issue
1
Pages
e13400
ISSN
0145-8892 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2729146082
Cited by
21
References
2
Citations by year
2025: 7 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2
FWCI
1.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Journal of Food Processing and Preservation (publishedVersion)
Funders
Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Essential Oils and Antimicrobial Activity
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Insect Pest Control Strategies
Keywords
thyme essential oil, Lactobacillus plantarum, cell-free supernatant, Penicillium, antifungal synergy, rice grain, rice seeds, fungal spoilage, fractional inhibitory concentration index, cell membrane permeability, fungal cell wall degradation, food preservatives

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