Cited by 104Essential Oils and Antimicrobial ActivityMedicinal Plant ResearchMicrobial Inactivation Methods

In vitro antiviral activity of clove and ginger aqueous extracts against feline calicivirus, a surrogate for human norovirus

Open access
Aboubakr, Hamada A., Nauertz, Andrew, Luong, Nhungoc T., Agrawal, Shivani, El-Sohaimy, Sobhy A.A., Youssef, Mohammed M., Goyal, Sagar M.·2016·Journal of Food Protection

Abstract

Foodborne viruses, particularly human norovirus, are a concern for public health, especially in fresh vegetables and other minimally processed foods that may not undergo sufficient decontamination. It is necessary to explore novel nonthermal techniques for preventing foodborne viral contamination. In this study, aqueous extracts of six raw food materials (flower buds of clove, fenugreek seeds, garlic and onion bulbs, ginger rhizomes, and jalapeño peppers) were tested for antiviral activity against feline calicivirus (FCV) as a surrogate for human norovirus. The antiviral assay was performed using dilutions of the extracts below the maximum nontoxic concentrations of the extracts to the host cells of FCV, Crandell-Reese feline kidney (CRFK) cells. No antiviral effect was seen when the host cells were pretreated with any of the extracts. However, pretreatment of FCV with nondiluted clove and ginger extracts inactivated 6.0 and 2.7 log of the initial titer of the virus, respectively. Also, significant dosedependent inactivation of FCV was seen when host cells were treated with clove and ginger extracts at the time of infection or postinfection at concentrations equal to or lower than the maximum nontoxic concentrations. By comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis, eugenol (29.5%) and R-(-)-1,2-propanediol (10.7%) were identified as the major components of clove and ginger extracts, respectively. The antiviral effect of the pure eugenol itself was tested; it showed antiviral activity similar to that of clove extract, albeit at a lower level, which indicates that some other clove extract constituents, along with eugenol, are responsible for inactivation of FCV. These results showed that the aqueous extracts of clove and ginger hold promise for prevention of foodborne viral contamination.

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 · 10.4315/0362-028x.jfp-15-593

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • Application of CEO in the process of washing fruits and vegetables eliminates any viral load that may exist; application of CEO in cleaning wipes allows the decontamination of surfaces.

    “For this reason, the application of CEO in the process of washing fruits and vegetables eliminates any viral load that may exist. In addition, the application of CEO in cleaning wipes allows the decontamination of surfaces [113].”

    From Clove essential oil (Syzygium aromaticum L. Myrtaceae): Extraction, chemical composition, food applications, and essential bioactivity for human health (2021) · cites this paper as [113]

    The Discussion proposes adding clove and ginger aqueous extracts to produce-washing water and using them in wipes for surface decontamination, but says these applications need further verification. It does not show that clove essential oil (CEO) eliminates any viral load on produce or that CEO wipes decontaminate surfaces; its experiments tested aqueous extracts against feline calicivirus in vitro. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 35 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Aboubakr, H. A., Nauertz, A., Luong, N. T., Agrawal, S., El-Sohaimy, S. A. A., Youssef, M. M., & Goyal, S. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • Alexandria University (EG)
Corresponding author
Goyal, Sagar M.
Venue
Journal of Food Protection
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-06
Volume
79
Issue
6
Pages
1001-1012
ISSN
0362-028X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2413658938
Cited by
104
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 2
FWCI
5.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Food Protection (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Minnesota
  • Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research
  • Ministère de l'Education Nationale, de l'Enseignement Superieur et de la Recherche
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Essential Oils and Antimicrobial Activity
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Medicinal Plant Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Biotechnology › Microbial Inactivation Methods
Keywords
feline calicivirus, clove extract, ginger extract, antiviral activity, eugenol, propylene glycol, non-thermal food preservation, food contact materials, fenugreek seeds, jalapeño
MeSH terms
Animals, Antiviral Agents, Cats, Cell Line, Humans, Calicivirus, Feline, Zingiber officinale, Syzygium, Norovirus

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