SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Animal Health Production and Hygiene / 2026 / Cilt: 15 Sayı: 1

In Vitro Antibacterial Activity of Aqueous and Acetone Extracts Obtained from Epiphytic Lichens

Epifitik Likenlerden Elde Edilen Su ve Aseton Ekstraktlarının İn Vitro Koşullarda Antibakteriyel Aktivitesi

Timuçin Taş(Balıkesir Üniversitesi, Kepsut MYO, Laborant ve Veterinerlik Bölümü)0000-0002-2144-9064
Orkun Babacan(BALIKESIR UNIVERSITY, KEPSUT VOCATIONAL SCHOOL)0000-0003-0258-1825
Handan Kurtulmuş Sancak(BALIKESİR ÜNİVERSİTESİ, EDREMİT MESLEK YÜKSEKOKULU)0000-0003-3531-8548
Fatma Korkmaz(BALIKESİR ÜNİVERSİTESİ, MÜHENDİSLİK FAKÜLTESİ, GIDA MÜHENDİSLİĞİ BÖLÜMÜ, GIDA MÜHENDİSLİĞİ PR.)0000-0002-6834-4833
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-03-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

These results indicate that acetone provides a more suitable medium for the isolation of lipophilic antibacterial compounds from lichen materials.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Lichens produce a wide variety of biologically active secondary metabolites that contribute to their ecological adaptation and pharmacological potential.
📊
Key Findings & Data:MIC assessment revealed significant differences in antibacterial performance depending on both the lichen species and the solvent used for extraction.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:These results indicate that acetone provides a more suitable medium for the isolation of lipophilic antibacterial compounds from lichen materials.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Antibakteriyel · ağaç likeni · minimum inhibitör konsantrasyon (MIC)

Abstract

Lichens produce a wide variety of biologically active secondary metabolites that contribute to their ecological adaptation and pharmacological potential. This study was conducted to investigate the antibacterial effects of acetone and water extracts obtained from the lichen species Pseudevernia furfuracea (L.) Zopf, Platismatia glauca (L.) W.L. Culb, and Ramalina farinacea (L.) Ach on bacterial species such as Listeria innocua (Gram positive), Staphylococcus epidermidis (Gram positive), and Escherichia coli (Gram negative). The findings highlight the antibacterial potential of macrolichen species and suggest that they are promising natural sources for the development of plant-based antibacterial agents. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) method was used to determine the antibacterial properties of lichens. MIC assessment revealed significant differences in antibacterial performance depending on both the lichen species and the solvent used for extraction. Among the analyzed samples, Ramalina farinacea (L.) Ach exhibited the broadest inhibitory activity range and effectively suppressed the growth of all tested bacterial strains at comparatively low concentrations. Pseudevernia furfuracea (L.) Zopf showed significant activity mainly against S. epidermidis, while Platismatia glauca (L.) W.L. Culb exhibited a narrower activity limited to the same microorganism. In contrast, all water-based extracts were found to be inactive, and visible bacterial growth was detected in each test well. These results indicate that acetone provides a more suitable medium for the isolation of lipophilic antibacterial compounds from lichen materials. Overall, the findings suggest that solvent polarity and species-specific metabolite composition play a critical role in shaping the antimicrobial potential of lichen-derived extracts.

Özet

Likenler, ekolojik adaptasyonlarına ve farmakolojik potansiyellerine katkıda bulunan çok çeşitli biyolojik olarak aktif ikincil metabolitler üretirler. Bu çalışma, Pseudevernia furfuracea (L.) Zopf, Platismatia glauca (L.) W.L. Culb ve Ramalina farinacea (L.) Ach liken türlerinden elde edilen aseton ve su ekstraktların, Listeria innocua (Gram pozitif), Staphylococcus epidermidis (Gram pozitif) ve Escherichia coli (Gram negatif) gibi bakteri türleri üzerindeki antibakteriyel etkilerini araştırmak amacıyla yürütülmüştür. Bulgular, makroliken türlerinin antibakteriyel potansiyelini vurgulamakta ve bitki temelli antibakteriyel ajanların geliştirilmesi için umut verici doğal kaynaklar olduklarını göstermektedir. Likenlerin antibakteriyel özelliklerinin belirlenmesi için, minimum inhibitör konsantrasyonları (MIC) yöntemi kullanılmıştır. MIC değerlendirmesi, hem liken türüne hem de ekstraksiyonda kullanılan çözücüye bağlı olarak antibakteriyel performansta belirgin farklılıklar ortaya koymuştur. Analiz edilen örnekler arasında, Ramalina farinacea (L.) Ach en geniş inhibitör etki aralığını sergilemiş ve test edilen tüm bakteri suşlarının büyümesini karşılaştırmalı olarak düşük konsantrasyonlarda etkili bir şekilde baskılamıştır. Pseudevernia furfuracea (L.) Zopf esas olarak Staphylococcus epidermidis’e karşı belirgin aktivite gösterirken, Platismatia glauca (L.) W.L. Culb aynı mikroorganizmayla sınırlı daha dar bir etki sunmuştur. Buna karşılık, tüm su bazlı ekstraktlar etkisiz bulunmuş ve her test kuyusunda gözle görülür bakteri üremesi tespit edilmiştir. Bu sonuçlar, asetonun liken materyallerinden lipofilik antibakteriyel bileşenlerin izole edilmesi için daha uygun bir ortam sağladığını göstermektedir. Genel olarak, bulgular çözücü polaritesinin ve türe özgü metabolit bileşiminin liken kaynaklı ekstraktların antimikrobiyal potansiyelinin şekillenmesinde kritik bir rol oynadığını ortaya koymaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Taş, T., Babacan, O., Sancak, H. K., Korkmaz, F. (2026). In Vitro Antibacterial Activity of Aqueous and Acetone Extracts Obtained from Epiphytic Lichens. Animal Health Production and Hygiene, Cilt: 15 Sayı: 1. https://doi.org/10.53913/aduveterinary.1862735

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (25)

  1. Aoussar, N., Laasri, F.E., Bourhia, M., Manoljovic, N., Mhand, R.A., Rhallabi, N., & Mellouki, F. (2020). Phytochemical analysis, cytotoxic, antioxidant, and antibacterial activities of lichens. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine (Hindawi), 2, 8104538. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/8104538
  2. Boustie, J., & Grube, M. (2005). Lichens - A promising source of bioactive secondary metabolites. Plant Genetic Resources, 3(2), 273–287. https://doi.org/10.1079/PGR200572
  3. Brodo, I.M., Sharnoff, S.D., & Sharnoff, S. (2001). Lichens of North America. Yale University Press, Available from the Nature Saskatchewan Bookshop (pp.60-61). http://doi.org/10.29173/bluejay5827
  4. Elix, J. A., Whitton, A. A., & Stevens, G. N. (1986). Chemistry and biological activity of lichen substances. Australian Journal of Botany, 34(6), 671-681. https://doi.org/10.1071/BT9860671
  5. Elkhateeb, W.A., El-Ghwas, D.E., & Daba, G.M. (2023). Lichen secondary metabolites as antifungal agents. Journal of Pharmacy & Drug Development, 2(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.58489/2836-2322/016
  6. Eucast (2003). European Committee for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. EUCAST of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Disease (ESCMID). Determination of minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of antibacterial agents by broth dilution. Clinical Microbiology and Infection, 9, 1–7.
  7. Eucast (2017). European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptability Testing. Breakpoint tables for interpretation of MICs and zone diameters. Version 9.0. Available at http://www.eucast.org/fileadmin/src/media/PDFs/EUCAST_files/Breakpoint_tables/v_9.0_Breakpoint_ Tables.pdf
  8. Eucast (2019). European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. EUCAST guidelines for detection of resistance mechanisms and specific resistances of clinical and/or epidemiological importance. Version 2.0. Available at https://www.eucast.org/fileadmin/src/media/PDFs/EUCAST_files/Resistance_mechanisms/EUCAST_detection_of_resistance_mechanisms_170711.pdf
  9. Eucast (2024). European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptability Testing. EUCAST reading guide for broth microdilution. Version 5.0. Available at https://www.eucast.org/fileadmin/src/media/PDFs/EUCAST_files/MIC_testing/Reading_guide_BMD_v_5.0_2024.pdf
  10. Essadki, Y., Hilmi, A., Cascajosa-Lira, A., Girão, M., Darrag, E.M., Martins, R., & Carvalho, M. D. F. (2024). In vitro antimicrobial activity of volatile compounds from the lichen Pseudevernia furfuracea (L.) Zopf against multidrug-resistant bacteria and fish pathogens. Microorganisms, 12 (11), 2336. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms12112336
  11. Furmanek, Ł., Czarnota, P., & Seaward, M.R.D. (2022). A review of the potential of lichen substances as antifungal agents: The effects of extracts and lichen secondary metabolites on Fusarium fungi. Archives of Microbiology, 204, 523. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00203-022-03104-4
  12. Furmanek, Ł., Czarnota, P., Tekiela, A., & Kapusta, I. (2024). A spectrophotometric analysis of extracted water-soluble phenolic metabolites of lichens. Planta, 260, 40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00425-024-04474-3
  13. Kello, M., Goga, M., Kotorova, K., Sebova, D., Frenak, R., Tkacikova, L., & Mojzis, J. (2023). Screening evaluation of antiproliferative, antimicrobial and antioxidant activity of lichen extracts and secondary metabolites in vitro. Plants, 12(3), 611. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12030611
  14. Kosanić, M., & Ranković, B. (2011). Antioxidant and antimicrobial properties of some lichens and their constituents. Journal of Medicinal Food, 14(12), 1624–1630. https://doi.org/10.1089/jmf.2010.0316
  15. Mitrovic, T., Stamenkovic, S., Cvetkovic, V., Radulovic, N., Mladenovic, M., Stankovic, M., & Comic, L. (2014). Platismatia glaucia and Pseudevernia furfuracea lichens as sources of antioxidant, antimicrobial and antibiofilm agents. EXCLI journal, 13, 938–953.
  16. Molnár, K., & Farkas, E. (2010). Current results on biological activities of lichen secondary metabolites: A review. Zeitschrift für Naturforschung C, 65(3–4), 157–173. https://doi.org/10.1515/znc-2010-3-401
  17. Moreira, A.S.N., Almeida, M.T., Carvalho, P., & Pereira, E. (2015). Chemistry and biological activity of Ramalina lichenized fungi: A review. Molecules, 20(10), 19593–19611. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules201019593
  18. Quinn, P.J., Markey, B.K., Carter, M.E., Donnelly, W.J., & Leonard, F.C. (2002). Veterinary microbiology and microbial disease. The Canadian Veterinary Journal, 44(12), 986. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC340368/
  19. Schmul, M., & Brown, D. (2009). Pseudevernia furfuracea, the mummy’s lichen at the Farlow Herbarium. Opuscula Philolichenum, 6, 45-50. http://doi.org/10.5962/p.381966
  20. Shrestha, G., & St. Clair, L.L. (2013). Lichens: A promising source of antibiotic and anticancer drugs. Phytochemistry Reviews, 12(1), 229–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11101-013-9283-7
  21. Smith, C.W., Aptroot, A., Coppins, B.J., Fletcher, A., Gilbert, O.L., James, P.W., & Wolseley, P. A. (2009). The lichens of great Britain and Ireland. The British Lichen Society, London.
  22. Srivastava, P., Upreti, D.K., Dhole, T.N., Srivastava, A.K., Apurva, K. & Nayak, M.T. (2013). Antimicrobial property of extracts of Indian lichen against human pathogenic bacteria. Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Infectious Diseases (Wiley), 6, 709348. http://doi.org/10.1155/2013/709348
  23. Stocker-Wörgötter, E. (2010). Current results on biological activities of lichen secondary metabolites: A review. The Lichenologist, 42(3), 261–272. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0024282910000016
  24. Studzińska-Sroka, E., Kucinska, M., Bylka, W., Sznitowska, M., Gendaszewska-Darmach, E., & Kaczmarek, Ł. (2022). Is caperatic acid the only compound responsible for activity of lichen Platismatia glauca within the nervous system? Molecules, 27(21), 7325. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27217325
  25. Zhao, Y., Zhang, X., Pan, Y., & Wang, Y. (2021). A comprehensive review on secondary metabolites and biological activities of lichens. Phytochemistry Reviews, 20(6), 1251–1272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11101-021-09756-3