Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 266

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Antibacterial effects of curcumin: An in vitro minimum inhibitory concentration study

Gunes, Hayati, Gulen, Dumrul, Mutlu, Reyhan, Gumus, Abdullah, Tas, Tekin, Topkaya, Aynur Eren·2016·Toxicology and Industrial Health

Abstract

Aim: To evaluate the antibacterial effect of curcumin with the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) method in standard bacterial strains. Methods: The in vitro antibacterial activity of curcumin was evaluated against methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) (ATCC 29213), methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) (ATCC 43300), Enterococcus faecalis (ATCC 29212), Bacillus subtilis (ATCC 6633), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (ATCC 27853), Escherichia coli (ATCC 25922) and Klebsiella pneumoniae (ATCC 700603) using the macrodilution broth susceptibility test method. After incubation in tubes, the antibacterial activity of curcumin was detected by a lack of turbidity, which indicated the inhibition of bacterial growth. The concentration in the tube with the highest dilution showing no turbidity was defined as the MIC. Results: The curcumin MIC values were 175 µg/ml, 129 µg/ml, 219 µg/ml, 217 µg/ml, 163 µg/ml, 293 µg/ml and 216 µg/ml against P. aeruginosa, B. subtilis, MSSA, MRSA, E . coli, E. faecalis and K. Pneumonia, respectively. Conclusion: This study revealed antibacterial effects of curcumin against standard bacterial strains in high concentrations. Animal experiments have demonstrated that curcumin applied at high doses has strong antibacterial activity. There is a need for further in vivo studies to shed light on antibacterial effects of curcumin with high concentrations.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0748233713498458

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 34

  1. 10.1177/0748233711407242 · DOI
  2. 10.1177/0748233711425080 · DOI
  3. 10.1055/s-2006-960004 · DOI · Paper page
  4. 10.1590/S0074-02762001000500026 · DOI · Paper page
  5. 10.1590/S0074-02761999000600015 · DOI
  6. Bhavani Sankar TN, 1979, Indian Journal of Experimental Biology, 17, 1363
  7. Chandra D, 1972, Indian Journal of Medical Research, 60, 138
  8. Chopra RN, 1941, Indian Journal of Medical Research, 29, 769
  9. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2011, Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing: 21st Informational Supplement. M100-S21
  10. Crichton PB, 2008, Mackie and McCartney Practical Medical Microbiology, 361
  11. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-0024 · DOI
  12. 10.1100/2012/637953 · DOI
  13. Ekrami A, 2007, Indian Journal of Medical Research, 126, 541
  14. Erenoglu C, 2011, Balkan Medical Journal, 28, 352
  15. 10.1080/10408398009527278 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Heggel AB, 2010, Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, 62, 1458
  17. Hosny IM, 2011, Journal of American Science, 7, 611
  18. 10.1016/0014-2999(92)90727-L · DOI
  19. 10.1099/jmm.0.042275-0 · DOI
  20. 10.1248/cpb.41.1640 · DOI
  21. 10.1007/s10735-012-9452-9 · DOI
  22. 10.1093/jac/dkn488 · DOI
  23. 10.1016/0006-2952(95)98514-A · DOI
  24. 10.1128/AAC.50.5.1859-1860.2006 · DOI
  25. 10.3923/ijp.2011.874.879 · DOI
  26. 10.1016/j.jhin.2012.10.003 · DOI
  27. 10.1007/BF00229582 · DOI · Paper page
  28. 10.1055/s-2000-8533 · DOI
  29. 10.1016/j.bbrc.2004.11.051 · DOI
  30. Sharma M, 2010, FEMS Yeast Research, 10, 570
  31. 10.1016/j.foodcont.2012.09.012 · DOI
  32. 10.1111/j.1462-2920.2004.00590.x · DOI
  33. Tajbakhsh S, 2008, African Journal of Biotechnology, 21, 3832
  34. 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2009.09.001 · DOI

Cited by

See all 266

Metadata

Authors
Gunes, H., Gulen, D., Mutlu, R., Gumus, A., Tas, T., & Topkaya, A. E.
Affiliations
  • Department of Medical Microbiology, Medical Faculty, Namik Kemal University, Tekirdag, Turkey
  • Department of Medical Microbiology, Medical Faculty, Abant Izzet Baysal University, Bolu, Turkey
Venue
Toxicology and Industrial Health
Published
2013-10-04
Volume
32
Issue
2
Pages
246-250
ISSN
  • 0748-2337
  • 1477-0393
Cited by
266
References
1
Language
en
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Antibacterial effects of curcumin: An in vitro minimum inhibitory concentration study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0748233713498458
The paper
Gunes, H., Gulen, D., Mutlu, R., Gumus, A., Tas, T., & Topkaya, A. E. (2016). Antibacterial effects of curcumin: An in vitro minimum inhibitory concentration study. Toxicology and Industrial Health. https://doi.org/10.1177/0748233713498458

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.