Cited by 2,186Essential Oils and Antimicrobial ActivityAntimicrobial agents and applicationsInsect Pest Control Strategies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 135 of the 139 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 225 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Effect of Essential Oils on Pathogenic Bacteria

Open access
Nazzaro, Filomena, Fratianni, Florinda, De Martino, Laura, Coppola, Raffaele, De Feo, Vincenzo·2013·Pharmaceuticals

Abstract

The increasing resistance of microorganisms to conventional chemicals and drugs is a serious and evident worldwide problem that has prompted research into the identification of new biocides with broad activity. Plants and their derivatives, such as essential oils, are often used in folk medicine. In nature, essential oils play an important role in the protection of plants. Essential oils contain a wide variety of secondary metabolites that are capable of inhibiting or slowing the growth of bacteria, yeasts and moulds. Essential oils and their components have activity against a variety of targets, particularly the membrane and cytoplasm, and in some cases, they completely change the morphology of the cells. This brief review describes the activity of essential oils against pathogenic bacteria.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This narrative review summarizes how essential oils and their components act against pathogenic bacteria, emphasizing membrane/cytoplasm disruption, fatty-acid and protein effects, ATP/ATPase inhibition, metabolome changes, morphology alterations, and anti-quorum-sensing activity. It concludes that activity is composition-dependent, often stronger against Gram-positive bacteria, and not attributable to a single mechanism.

Key findings

  • Gram-negative bacteria are generally more resistant to essential oils than Gram-positive bacteria; the Gram-positive cell wall is approximately 90%–95% peptidoglycan, whereas the Gram-negative peptidoglycan layer is 2–3 nm thick, composes approximately 20% of cell dry weight, and is covered by an outer membrane containing lipopolysaccharides.
  • Many terpenes have low or no inherent antimicrobial activity: limonene, α-pinene, β-pinene, γ-terpinene, δ-3-carene, (+)-sabinene, and α-terpinene showed very low or no antimicrobial activity against 25 genera of bacteria, and p-cymene did not show antimicrobial activity against many Gram-negative pathogens.
  • Thymol and carvacrol have similar antimicrobial activity against *B. cereus*, *S. aureus*, and *P. aeruginosa*; carvacrol disintegrates the outer membrane of Gram-negative bacteria and causes lipopolysaccharide release. Cinnamaldehyde at 60 μM reduced *V. harveyi* BB886 bioluminescence by 55%, and at 100 μM reduced *V. harveyi* BB170 bioluminescence by 60%.
  • Eugenol or carvacrol at 5 to 10 mM had bactericidal effects on *E. coli* and *L. monocytogenes*, while cinnamaldehyde had bactericidal activity against *E. coli* and *L. monocytogenes* at 10 mM and 30 mM concentrations, respectively. Mechanisms include increased membrane permeability, K+ and ATP leakage, reduced proton motive force, ATPase inhibition, altered fatty-acid profiles, protein and FtsZ effects, metabolome shifts, cell morphology changes, and anti-quorum-sensing activity.

Methods

  • Narrative review (“brief review”) of essential oils against pathogenic bacteria; no systematic review protocol, search strategy, inclusion/exclusion criteria, or primary experimental data are reported.
  • Evidence base consists of cited in vitro and model studies on bacterial species/strains and essential oil components; synthesis is qualitative and organized by chemical class and mechanism.
  • Main analysis is descriptive integration of reported mechanisms and examples; no meta-analysis or quantitative pooling is described.

Limitations

  • Stated in the paper: susceptibility is difficult to predict not only for a species but also for a strain within the same species; identifying the mode of action requires study of the raw material, singular components, and multiple strains and species; antimicrobial activity is not attributable to a unique mechanism but to a cascade of reactions.
  • Stated/evident: conflicting reports exist, for example on the role of carvacrol’s hydroxyl group and on cinnamaldehyde’s membrane-perturbing activity; the review is brief and narrative, without systematic search or quality appraisal.
  • Evident from the text: most evidence is in vitro, with no standardized comparison across essential oils, doses, strains, or methods, and no clinical or application data are synthesized.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/ph6121451

Cites

135 of 135 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 225 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 105 claims

  • The quote only partly states this claim. 2
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 84
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 15
95 of 95
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The cell wall of Gram-positive bacteria consists of approximately 90%–95% peptidoglycan.

    “Approximately 90%–95% of the cell wall of Gram-positive bacteria consists of peptidoglycan, to which other molecules, such as teicoic acid and proteins, are linked (Figure 1).”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The cell wall of Gram-negative bacteria has a peptidoglycan layer 2–3 nm thick and an outer membrane outside the peptidoglycan layer.

    “It has a peptidoglycan layer that is 2–3 nm thick, which is thinner than in the cell wall of Gram-positive bacteria, and composes approximately 20% of the dry weight of the cell. An outer membrane (OM) lies outside of the thin peptidoglycan layer.”
2 of 2

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.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Mustard-oil treatment names different bacteria from the reported result

    Minor

    The sentence identifies E. coli and Salmonella as the bacteria treated with mustard oil, but says the resulting ATP loss was in S. aureus. The cited reference instead concerns oregano oil and S. aureus.

  • Intracellular ATP is said to increase and to be lost after EO exposure

    Minor

    One passage says components including thymol and carvacrol increase intracellular ATP in connection with membrane destruction; another describes EO-induced membrane disruption as causing ATP to leave the cell. The opposing directions are not reconciled in the text.

2 of 2

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 139 references

4 of the 139 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Neidhardt, F.C. (1996). Escherichia coli and Salmonella: Cellular and Molecular biology, ASM Press.
  2. Caballero, B., Trugo, L.C., and Finglas, P.M. (2003). Encyclopedia of Food Sciences and Nutrition, Elsevier Academic Press. [2nd ed.].
  3. Beuchat, M.P., and Montville, L.R. (2001). Food Microbiology. Fundamentals and Frontiers, ASM Press. [2nd ed.].
  4. Méndez-Vilas, A. (2011). Science Against Microbial Pathogens: Communicating Current Research and Technological Advances, Brown Walker Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 701–800 of 1,000

Metadata

Authors
Nazzaro, F., Fratianni, F., De Martino, L., Coppola, R., & De Feo, V.
Affiliations
  • Institute of Food Science (IT)
  • Dipartimento di Farmacia,Via Giovanni Paolo II, 132, 84084 Fisciano (SA), Italy
  • University of Salerno (IT)
Corresponding author
Nazzaro, Filomena
Venue
Pharmaceuticals
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2013-11-25
Volume
6
Issue
12
Pages
1451-1474
ISSN
1424-8247 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2011444187
Cited by
2,186
References
139
Citations by year
2026: 247 · 2025: 233 · 2024: 209 · 2023: 258 · 2022: 245 · 2021: 234 · 2020: 235 · 2019: 150 · 2018: 145 · 2017: 105 · 2016: 77 · 2015: 33 · 2014: 12
FWCI
60.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Pharmaceuticals (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Archivio Istituzionale della Ricerca - Università degli Studi del Molise (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Essential Oils and Antimicrobial Activity
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology › Antimicrobial agents and applications
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Insect Pest Control Strategies
Keywords
essential oils, pathogenic bacteria, antibacterial activity, antimicrobial resistance, plant secondary metabolites, biocides, bacterial membrane disruption, cell morphology, molds and yeasts

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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