Key words
mushrooms - Basidiomycetes - antimicrobials - gram-positive bacteria - gram-negative
bacteria
Abbreviations
CSAP:
Cordyceps sinensis antibacterial protein
CFU:
colony forming unities
ERSP:
erythromycin-resistant Streptococcus pyogenes
HMW:
high-molecular weight compounds
IC50
:
concentration inhibiting 50 % of the growth
IZD:
internal zone diameter
LMW:
low-molecular weight compounds
M:
mycelium
MIC:
minimal inhibitory concentration
MRSA:
methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus
MRSE:
methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis
PABA:
para-aminobenzoic acid
PRSP:
penicillin-resistant Streptococcus pneumonia
VREF:
vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium
Introduction
Mushroom bioactivity
For a long time, mushrooms have been playing an important role in several aspects
of human activity. Edible mushrooms, for example, are used extensively in cooking
and make up part of low-calorie diets. Mythology is extensively garnished by mushrooms
and is typically associated with gnomes, fairies, and other fairytale personages.
The psychedelic and consciousness expansion properties of some species have pushed
mushrooms to become part of some religions. Even toxic mushrooms have found a place
of relevance, because of the uniqueness of their compounds that evolved naturally
as a protection against consumption [1].
Wild and cultivated mushrooms contain a huge diversity of biomolecules with nutritional
[2] and/or medicinal properties [3], [4], [5]. Due to these properties, they have been recognized as functional foods, and as
a source for the development of medicines and nutraceuticals. Fruiting bodies, mycelia,
and spores accumulate a variety of bioactive metabolites with immunomodulatory, cardiovascular,
liver protective, antifibrotic, anti-inflammatory, antidiabetic, antiviral, antioxidant,
antitumor, and antimicrobial properties [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14].
The frequent use of mushrooms is based on three main assumptions: first, they are
used as part of a regular diet for their nutritional value (since they are rich in
water, minerals, proteins, fibers, and carbohydrates, and are low-caloric foods due
to a low content in fat [2]); secondly, fruiting bodies are also appreciated for their delicacy (they are palatability
enhancers of flavor and aroma when associated to other foods); and thirdly, mushrooms
are widely used for medicinal purposes. Their pharmacological action and therapeutic
interest in promoting human health have been known for thousands of years [5], [15], [16].
In particular, mushrooms could be a source of natural antibiotics, which can be LMW
and HMW, respectively, compounds. LMW compounds are mainly secondary metabolites such
as sesquiterpenes and other terpenes, steroids, anthraquinone and benzoic acid derivatives,
and quinolines, but also primary metabolites such as oxalic acid ([Fig. 1]). HMW compounds mainly include peptides and proteins.
Fig. 1 Chemical structure of the low-molecular weight (LMW) compounds with antimicrobial
potential found in mushrooms.
It is estimated that there are about 140 000 species of mushrooms on earth, and of
these only 22 000 are known and only a small percentage (5 %) has been investigated.
Therefore, there is much to explore about mushroom properties and potential applications
[4].
Bacteria and drug discovery
The development of antibiotics has been one of the most important scientific achievements
of the last seventy years. These compounds act in several ways, by interfering in
metabolic processes or in the organism structures [17]. The mechanism of action is mostly related with interferences in the synthesis of
the cell wall, modification of plasmatic membrane permeability, interferences in chromosome
replication, or in protein synthesis [18]. The cell wall is responsible for the shape and rigidity of bacterial cells, acting
as an osmotic barrier [19]. The peptidoglycan content in the cell wall varies between 10 % and 60 % for gram-negative
and gram-positive bacteria, respectively [20], [21].
Antiparietal antibiotics act in one of the phases of peptidoglycan synthesis, being
classified according to that phase. Phosphomycin, D-cycloserine, glycopeptides (bacitracin,
vancomycin, teicoplanin), and beta-lactams (penicillins, cephalosporins, carbapenemics,
monobactamics) are some examples of this group [22].
Otherwise, other antibiotics such as ascolistin and daptomycin act at the cell membrane
level. Aminoglycosides and tetracyclines, macrolides, oxazolidines, quinupristin and
dalfopristin, clindamycin, and chloramphenicol inhibit protein synthesis by interfering
with 30 s or 50 s ribosomal subunits. Quinolones, rifampicin, and metronidazol inhibit
nucleic acid synthesis. Sulfonamides and trimetoprim are antimetabolic antibiotics
that inhibit the metabolic chain of PABA, essential to cell growth [23].
Despite the huge diversity of antibacterial compounds, bacterial resistance to first-choice
antibiotics has been drastically increasing. Some examples are microorganisms such
as Klebsiella spp. and Escherichia coli, which produce broad-spectrum beta-lactamase or present resistance to third-generation
cephalosporins. Other examples include MRSA, Enterococcus spp., which is resistant to vancomycin [24], [25], Acinetobacter spp. with an increasing resistance to carbapenems and colistin [26], and Pseudomonas spp., which is resistant to aminoglycosides, carbapenemics. and/or cephalosporins
[24].
Diseases that were easily healed are nowadays becoming a serious problem due to emergent
antibiotic resistance [27], [28]. The association between multiresistant microorganisms and hospital infections certainly
highlights this problem and the urgent need for solutions [29]. In 2010, the World Health Organization advised all countries to implement control
procedures for the propagation of drug multiresistant bacteria, highlighting the risks
associated to the absence of alternative therapies against those microorganisms [30].
Therefore, the research of new antimicrobial substances effective against pathogenic
microorganisms resistant to current drugs is crucial. New groups of organisms, such
as marine, have been increasingly explored in the last years, and among them, mushrooms
could be an alternative source for new antimicrobials. In this review, we provide
an overview about the antimicrobial properties of mushroom extracts and highlight
selected compounds. The databases searched were Medline (1980 to March 2012) and Web
of Science (2001 to March 2012) including scientific articles and conference proceedings.
Search terms were: “mushrooms”, “antimicrobial activity”, and “antimicrobials”. An
exhaustive literature search was performed, but only mushroom extracts and isolated
compounds with positive results were included.
Antimicrobial Activity Against Gram-Positive Bacteria
Antimicrobial Activity Against Gram-Positive Bacteria
Methodologies
Different methodologies have been used to assess antimicrobial activity of mushroom
extracts and compounds, including the microdilution method, the disk diffusion method,
the agar streak dilution method based on radial diffusion, and a method with the incorporation
of the extract in the culture medium and further determination of colonies. Therefore,
the results for antimicrobial activity are expressed in different unities ([Tables 1] and [2]).
Table 1 Mushroom extracts with antimicrobial activity against gram-positive bacteria.
|
Microorganism
|
Mushrooma
|
Results
|
References
|
|
a Acetone, chloroform, ethanol, ethyl acetate, methanol, dichloromethane, ether, xylene,
or water extracts. M – mycelium, the other samples refer to the fruiting body; MRSA
– methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. The antimicrobial activity is expressed in CFU (colony forming unities), MIC (minimal
inhibitory concentrations), IZD (internal zone diameter), or IC50 (concentrations inhibiting 50 % of the growth) values
|
|
Actinomyces naeslundii
|
Lentinus edodes
|
CFU = 0–3.30 (± 5.48) × 106
MIC = 0.05–20 mg/mL
|
[53], [54], [67]
|
|
Actinomyces viscosus
|
Lentinus edodes
|
MIC = 0.05–20 mg/mL
|
[54]
|
|
Bacillus cereus
|
Agaricus bisporus, Agaricus bitorquis, Agaricus essettei, Agaricus silvicola, Armillaria
mellea, Boletus edulis, Cantharellus cibarius, Clitocybe alexandri, Clitocybe geotropa,
Cortinarius sp., Gloeoporus thelephoroides, Hexagonia hydnoides, Hydnum repandum,
Hypholoma fasciculare, Irpex lacteus (M), Lactarius camphorates, Lactarius delicious, Lactarius piperatus, Lactarius volemus,
Laetiporus sulphureus, Lentinus edodes, Lepista nuda, Leucopaxillus giganteus (M), Macrolepiota procera, Meripilus giganteus (M), Meripilus giganteus, Phellinus sp., Pleurotus ostreatus (M), Pleurotus ostreatus, Ramaria botrytis, Ramaria flava, Rhizopogon roseolus, Sarcodon
imbricatus, Sparassis crispa, Tricholoma portentosum
|
IZD = 5–21 mm MIC = 5 µg/mL – 100 mg/mL
|
[11], [15], [31], [32], [34], [35], [36], [37], [38], [45], [46], [47], [48], [50], [55]
|
|
Bacillus megaterium
|
Lentinus edodes
|
CFU = 0 (total inhibition)
|
[52]
|
|
Bacillus pumilis
|
Lentinus edodes
|
IZD = 14 mm
|
[50]
|
|
Bacillus subtilis
|
Agaricus bisporus, Agaricus bitorquis, Agaricus essettei, Agaricus silvicola, Armillaria
mellea, Cantharellus cibarius, Clitocybe alexandri, Clitocybe geotropa, Cortinarius
sp., Ganoderma lucidum, Hygrophorus agathosmus, Hypholoma fasciculare, Lactarius delicious,
Lactarius piperatus, Laetiporus sulphureus, Lentinus edodes, Lepista nuda,
Leucopaxillus giganteus (M), Meripilus giganteus (M), Navesporus floccosa, Paxillus involutus (M), Phellinus rimosus, Pleurotus ostreatus (M), Pleurotus ostreatus, Ramaria botrytis, Ramaria flava, Rhizopogon roseolus, Sparassis
crispa, Suillus collitinus, Tricholoma acerbum, Tricholoma portentosum
|
IZD = 5–28 mm MIC = 5 µg/mL – 300 mg/mL
|
[11], [15], [31], [35], [36], [37], [38], [39], [40], [44], [45], [46], [47], [48], [49], [50], [54], [55], [71]
|
|
Enterococcus faecalis
|
Lentinus edodes
|
IZD = 8 mm
|
[50]
|
|
Enterococcus faecium
|
Lentinus edodes
|
MIC > 1.5 – > 5 0 mg/mL
|
[54]
|
|
Lactobacillus casei
|
Lentinus edodes
|
CFU = 5.00 (± 7.07) × 10−1 − 9.28 (± 2 .76) × 102
MIC = 0.05–15 mg/mL
|
[53], [54], [67]
|
|
Listeria innocua
|
Lentinus edodes
|
IZD = 8 mm
|
[11]
|
|
Listeria monocytogenes
|
Lentinus edodes, Pycnoporus sanguineus (M),
|
IZD = 11–13 mm
|
[11], [34], [50]
|
|
Staphylococcus sp.
|
Lentinus edodes
|
IZD = 12 mm
|
[50]
|
|
Staphylococcus aureus
|
Agaricus bisporus, Agaricus bitorquis, Agaricus essettei, Agaricus silvícola, Armillaria
mellea, Boletus edulis, Cantharellus cibarius, Clitocybe geotropa, Cortinarius sp.,
Cortinarius abnormis, Cortinarius ardesiacus, Cortinarius archeri, Cortinarius austroalbidus,
Cortinarius austrovenetus, Cortinarius austroviolaceus, Cortinarius coelopus, Cortinarius
clelandii, Cortinarius [Dermocybe sp, Dermocybe canaria, Dermocybe kula], Cortinarius
fulvoiubatus, Cortinarius ianthinus, Cortinarius memoria-annae, Cortinarius persplendidus,
Cortinarius sinapicolor, Cortinarius submagellanicus, Cortinarius tricholomoides,
Cortinarius vinosipes, Ganoderma lucidum, Hydnum repandum, Hygrophorus agathosmus,
Hypholoma fasciculare, Irpex lacteus (M), Lactarius camphoratus, Lactarius delicious, Lactarius piperatus, Lactarius volemus,
Laetiporus sulphureus, Lentinus edodes, Lepista nuda, Leucopaxillus giganteus (M), Macrolepiota procera, Meripilus giganteus (M), Meripilus giganteus, Morchella elata (M), Morchella esculenta var. vulgaris (M), Navesporus floccosa, Nothopanus hygrophanus (M), Paxillus involutus (M), Phellinus rimosus, Pleurotus eryngii (M), Pleurotus ostreatus (M), Pleurotus sajor-caju, Pycnoporus sanguineus (M), Ramaria botrytis, Ramaria flava, Sparassis crispa, Suillus collitinus
|
CFU = 2.1 × 104
IZD = 8–24 mm MIC = 5 µg/mL − 50 mg/mL IC50 < 0.01 – ≥ 2.00 mg/mL
|
[10], [11], [15], [31], [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37], [39], [40], [44], [46], [47], [48], [49], [50], [52], [54], [55]
|
|
MRSA
|
Lentinus edodes, Phellinus linteus
|
IZD = 12 mm MIC = 500 µg/mL
|
[50], [51]
|
|
Staphylococcus epidermidis
|
Agaricus bisporus, Hygrophorus agathosmus, Lentinus edodes, Pleurotus sajor-caju,
Suillus collitinus
|
IZD = 11–27 mm MIC = 7.81–62.5 µg/mL
|
[11], [33], [44], [50]
|
|
Streptococcus gordonii
|
Lentinus edodes
|
MIC = 0.075–50 mg/mL
|
[54]
|
|
Streptococcus mitis
|
Lentinus edodes
|
MIC = 0.075–15 mg/mL
|
[54]
|
|
Streptococcus mutans
|
Lentinus edodes
|
CFU = 2.15 (± 5.58) × 105
MIC = 0.1–10 mg/mL
|
[53], [54], [67]
|
|
Streptococcus oralis
|
Lentinus edodes
|
MIC = 0.1 – > 50 mg/mL
|
[54]
|
|
Staphylococcus saprophyticus
|
Agaricus cf. nigrecentulus (M), Tyromyces duracinus (M)
|
IZD > 12 mm
|
[34]
|
|
Streptococcus pyogenes
|
Lentinus edodes
|
CFU = 6.0 × 104
|
[52]
|
|
Streptococcus salivarius
|
Lentinus edodes
|
MIC = 0.1–10 mg/mL
|
[54]
|
|
Streptococcus sanguinis
|
Lentinus edodes
|
CFU = 2.53 (± 0.62) × 106 – 5.06 (± 1,58) × 106
MIC = 0.075–50 mg/mL
|
[53], [54], [67]
|
|
Streptococcus sobrinus
|
Lentinus edodes
|
MIC = 0.075–20 mg/mL
|
[54]
|
|
Micrococcus flavus
|
Agaricus bisporus, Agaricus bitorquis, Agaricus essettei, Laetiporus sulphurous, Ramaria
flava
|
IZD = 20–23 ± 1 mm
|
[15], [47], [48]
|
|
Micrococcus luteus
|
Agaricus bisporus, Agaricus bitorquis, Agaricus essettei, Clitocybe alexandri, Laetiporus
sulphurous, Lentinus edodes, Ramaria flava
|
IZD = 10–21 ± 1 mm
|
[15], [38], [47], [48], [52]
|
|
Sarcina lutea
|
Armillaria mellea (M), Armillaria mellea, Clitocybe geotropa, Meripilus giganteus (M), Meripilus giganteus, Morchella costata (M), Morchella esculenta var. vulgaris (M), Paxillus involutus (M), Pleurotus ostreatus (M), Sparassis crispa
|
IZD = 8–27 mm
|
[35], [36]
|
Table 2 Mushroom compounds with antimicrobial activity against gram-positive bacteria.
|
Microorganism
|
Compound (mushroom)
|
Results
|
References
|
|
M – mycelium, the other samples refer to the fruiting body. The antimicrobial activity
is expressed in MIC (minimal inhibitory concentrations), IZD (internal zone diameter),
or IC50 (concentrations inhibiting 50 % of the growth) values. VREF – vancomycin-resistant
Enterococcus faecium; MRSA – methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus; MRSE – methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis; PRSP – penicillin-resistant Streptococcus pneumonia; ERSP – erythromycin- resistant Streptococcus pyogenes
|
|
Bacillus cereus
|
Confluentin (1a), Grifolin (1b) and Neogrifolin (1c) (Albatrellus flettii); 3,11-Dioxolanosta-8,24(Z)-diene-26-oic acid (2) (Jahnoporus hirtus); Oxalic acid (3) (Lentinus edodes M); Proteins and peptides: Plectasin (Pseudoplectania nigrella)
|
IZD = 17 mm MIC = 10 µg/mL – ≥ 128 mg/L
|
[56], [59], [63]
|
|
Bacillus subtilis
|
Peptides: Peptaibol Boletusin, Peptaibol Chrysospermin 3 and Peptaibol Chrysospermin
5 (Boletus spp.); Protein (Cordyceps sinensis); Enokipodins A, B, C and D (4a–d) (Flammulina velutipes M); Ganomycin A and B (5a, b) (Ganoderma pfeifferi)
|
MIC > 100 000 g/L IZD = 11–28 mm
|
[57], [58], [61], [64]
|
|
Bacillus thuringiensis
|
Plectasin (Pseudoplectania nigrella)
|
MIC = 0.5 mg/L
|
[63]
|
|
Corynebacterium diphtheriae
|
Plectasin (Pseudoplectania nigrella)
|
MIC = 8 mg/L
|
[63]
|
|
Corynebacterium jeikeium
|
Plectasin (Pseudoplectania nigrella)
|
MIC = 2 mg/L
|
[63]
|
|
Corynebacterium lilium
|
Peptaibol Boletusin, Peptaibol Chrysospermin 3 and Peptaibol Chrysospermin 5 (Boletus spp.)
|
IZD = 23–25 mm
|
[64]
|
|
Enterococcus faecalis
|
1a, 1b and 1c (Albatrellus flettii); 2 (Jahnoporus hirtus); Plectasin (Pseudoplectania nigrella)
|
MIC = 0.5 µg/mL – ≥ 128 mg/L
|
[56], [63]
|
|
Enterococcus faecium; VREF
|
Plectasin (Pseudoplectania nigrella)
|
MIC = 32–64 mg/L
|
[63]
|
|
Micrococcus flavus
|
5a, b (Ganoderma pfeifferi)
|
IZD = 25–26 mm
|
[57]
|
|
Staphylococcus aureus
|
Peptaibol Boletusin, Peptaibol Chrysospermin 3 and Peptaibol Chrysospermin 5 (Boletus spp.); Proteins (Cordyceps sinensis); 6-Methylxanthopurpurin-3-O-methyl ether (7), (1S,3S)-Austrocortilutein (8a), (1S,3R)- Austrocortilutein (8b), (1S,3S)-Austrocortirubin (8c) and Torosachrysone (8 d) (Cortinarius basirubencens); Physcion (9a), Erythroglaucin (9b) and Emodin (9c) (Cortinarius sp.); 4a–d (Flammulina velutipes M); 5a, b (Ganoderma pfeifferi); 3 (Lentinus edodes M); Ribonuclease (Pleurotus sajor-caju); Plectasin (Pseudoplectania nigrella);Fraction B (Pycnoporus sanguineus); Coloratin A (10) (Xylaria intracolarata)
|
IZD = 12–24 mm MIC = 0.156 mg/L–50 000 g/L IC50 = 0.7–> 50 µg/mL IC50 = 34 ± 4 µM
|
[10], [42], [57], [58], [59], [60], [61], [62], [63], [64]
|
|
MRSA
|
Plectasin (Pseudoplectania nigrella);
|
MIC = 32 mg/L
|
[63]
|
|
Staphylococcus epidermidis; MRSE
|
Plectasin (Pseudoplectania nigrella)
|
MIC = 8 mg/L
|
[63]
|
|
Streptococcus sp.
|
Peptaibol Chrysospermin 3 (Boletus spp.)
|
IZD = 9 mm
|
[60]
|
|
Streptococcus faecalis
|
3 (Lentinus edodes M.)
|
IZD = 13 mm
|
[59]
|
|
Streptococcus group A, B, C, G
|
Fraction B (Pycnoporus sanguineus)
|
MIC = 0.019–0.039 mg/mL
|
[42]
|
|
Streptococcus pneumonia; PRSP
|
Plectasin (Pseudoplectania nigrella)
|
MIC = 0.5 mg/L
|
[63]
|
|
Streptococcus pyogenes; ERSP
|
Plectasin (Pseudoplectania nigrella)
|
MIC = 0.125 mg/L
|
[63]
|
The microdilution method comprises microdilutions of the extract in liquid medium
using microplates to determine MIC or IC50 values. In the disk difusion method, the extract is incorporated in disks at different
concentrations, and the halo of growth inhibition is determined and represented by
IZD (internal zone diameter) values. The agar streak dilution method based on radial
diffusion is most widely used in extracts and implies the extract application in circular
holes made in solid medium. The result might be expressed in IZD or MIC values. Regarding
the fourth method, the extract is incorporated in the culture medium and then CFU
are determined.
Mushroom extracts with antimicrobial activity
Numerous mushroom extracts have been reported as having antimicrobial activity against
gram-positive bacteria ([Table 1]).
Agaricus bisporus, the most cultivated mushroom in the world, should be highlighted. Its methanolic
extract revealed MIC = 5 µg/mL against Bacillus subtilis, even lower than the standard ampicillin (MIC = 12.5 µg/mL) [31], and also showed activity against Bacillus cereus, Micrococcus luteus, Micrococcus flavus, Staphylococcus aureus, and Staphylococcus epidermidis [15], [32], [33]. Other Agaricus species have also demonstrated antimicrobial activity. Agaricus bitorquis and Agaricus essettei methanolic extracts showed an inhibitory effect upon all the tested gram-positive
bacteria [15]. Agaricus silvicola methanolic extract also revealed antimicrobial properties against Bacillus cereus (MIC = 5 µg/mL), Bacillus subtilis (MIC = 50 µg/mL), and against Staphylococcus aureus (MIC = 5 µg/mL), lower than the standard ampicillin (MIC = 6.25 µg/mL) [31]. The mycelium of Agaricus cf. nigrecentulus and Tyromyces duracinus (ethyl acetate extracts) showed activity only against Staphylococcus saprophyticus [34].
The ethanolic extracts of Armillaria mellea mycelium showed an antibacterial effect against Sarcina lutea; however, no activity was observed upon other gram-positive bacteria [35]. However, the ethanolic extract of their fruiting bodies showed broad-spectrum antimicrobial
activity [36].
The most studied mushroom of the genus Boletus is Boletus edulis. Its methanolic mushroom showed lower antimicrobial activity than other species studied
by Ozen et al. [32]. Nevertheless, Barros et al. [31] reported an MIC = 5 µg/mL against Staphylococcus aureus, lower than ampicillin (MIC = 6.25 µg/mL).
Cantharellus cibarius methanolic extract demonstrated good activity against Bacillus subtilis and Staphylococcus aureus [31], [32], [37]. This mushroom also showed activity against Bacillus cereus in some studies [32], [37], but it was not so effective in another report [31], which could be related to the different methodologies used to evaluate antimicrobial
activity.
Clitocybe alexandri methanolic extract presented significant activity against Bacillus subtilis and Micrococcus luteus [38]. Kalyoncu et al. [36] tested antimicrobial activity of chloroform and ethanolic extracts from Clitocybe geotropa, the latter showing asignificant capacity against Bacillus cereus.
The genus Cortinarius is one of the most diverse genera of mushrooms. Ethyl acetate
extracts of C. ardesiacus, C. archeri, C. atrosanguineus, C. austrovenetus, C. austroviolaceus,
C. coelopus, C. [Dermocybe canaria], C. clelandii, C. [D. kula], C. memoria-annae,
C. persplendidus, C. sinapicolor, C. vinosipes, and 47 other collection samples not identified to the species level, exhibited IC50 values of ≤ 0.09 mg/mL against Staphylococcus aureus [10]. However, in a study reported by Ozen et al. [32], Cortinarius sp. methanolic extracts showed lower activity against Staphylococcus aureus. This demonstrates the effect of solvent extraction in the type and concentration
of compounds present in the final extract and, consequently, the spectrum of antimicrobial
activity.
Ganoderma lucidum is one of the most famous traditional medicinal mushrooms. Various extracts have
been found to be equally effective when compared to gentamycin sulphate, the acetone
extract being the most effective. This mushroom had moderate inhibition against Bacillus subtilis and Staphylococcus aureus for any extract [39], but in the study reported by Sheena et al. [40], its methanolic extract showed poor antimicrobial activity. Other authors described
the capacity of the aqueous extract to inhibit 15 types of gram-positive and gram-negative
bacteria, with the highest inhibition exhibited against Micrococcus luteus [41].
Ethyl acetate extracts of Phellinus sp., Gloeoporus thelephoroides, and Hexagonia hydnoides inhibited Bacillus cereus growth, while the same extract of Nothopanus hygrophanus mycelium presented inhibitory activity against Listeria monocytogenes and Staphylococcus aureus. Irpex lacteus mycelium extract was the most effective, presenting a broad spectrum of activity
[34].
The antimicrobial activity of Pycnoporus sanguineus has been known since 1946, when Bose isolated poliporin, a compound active against
gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria and without toxicity in experimental animals.
Rosa et al. reported inhibition against Listeria monocytogenes and Staphylococcus aureus [34]. Smânia et al. [42], [43] showed that this mushroom produces cinnabarine, an orange pigment active against
Bacillus cereus, Staphylococcus aureus, Leuconostoc mesenteroides, Lactobacillus plantarum, and several Streptococcus spp. Cinnabarine was more active against gram-positive than gram-negative bacteria
[34].
The chloroform extract of Hygrophorus agathosmus and dichloromethane of Suillus collitinus were active against all the tested gram-positive bacteria. The highest antibacterial
activity was seen in the extract of H. agathosmus against Staphylococcus epidermidis and Bacillus subtilis, with MIC values 7.81 µg/mL lower than the reference antibiotic streptomycin (MIC = 15.62 µg/mL).
MIC values (15.62 µg/mL) against Staphylococcus aureus were equal to the ones of streptomycin. Suillus collitinus showed MIC values much higher than the standard [44].
One nonedible mushroom, Hypholoma fasciculare (methanolic extract), presented high antimicrobial activity against gram-positive
bacteria, namely Bacillus cereus, Bacillus subtilis, and Staphylococcus aureus [37].
All the tested gram-positive bacteria were susceptible to methanolic extracts of Lactarius species and Tricholoma portentosum [32], [45], [46]. Among Lactarius species (L. piperatus, L. camphorates, L. volemus, L. delicious), L. camphoratus methanolic extract was the one with greater antimicrobial activity [32]. Methanolic extracts of Ramaria botrytis and the ethanolic extract of Ramaria flava inhibited the growth of gram-positive bacteria better than gram-negative bacteria
[47]. The antimicrobial effect of the ethanolic extract of Laetiporus sulphureus was tested by Turkoglu et al. [48] and strongly inhibited the growth of the gram-positive bacteria tested, including
Bacillus subtilis, Bacillus cereus, Micrococcus luteus, and Micrococcus flavus.
The Lepista nuda methanolic extract had a good action on gram-positive bacteria, more specifically
on Bacillus cereus, Bacillus subtilis, and Staphylococcus aureus [37], [49].
Ishikawa et al. reported the inhibitory activity of Lentinus edodes ethyl acetate extract against Bacillus cereus, Bacillus subtilis, Staphylococcus aureus, and Staphylococcus epidermidis [11]. This mushroom (aqueous extract) as well as the n-BuOH fraction of the Phellinus linteus methanol extract demonstrated good activity against MRSA [50], [51]. Furthermore, Streptococcus pyogenes was very sensitive to the Lentinus edodes chloroform extract [52]. The ability of L. edodes extracts to improve oral health has also been extensively researched, since it showed
a strong bactericidal effect upon Streptococcus mutans, which is strongly implicated in dental caries and tooth decay [53], [54].
The mycelium of Leucopaxillus giganteus (methanolic extract) presented antimicrobial capacity, inhibiting only gram-positive
bacteria and, in decreasing order, Staphylococcus aureus > Bacillus cereus > Bacillus subtilis [55]. The authors stated that the most promising nitrogen source to produce mushrooms
with an increased content in bioactive compounds that inhibit gram-positive bacteria
growth was (NH4)2HPO4.
The methanolic extracts of Phellinus rimosus and Navesporus floccosa showed moderate inhibition of Bacillus subtilis and Staphylococcus aureus [40].
Pleurotus ostreatus and Meripilus giganteus showed broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity. The maximum effect was shown by the
ethanolic extracts of Pleurotus ostreatus against Sarcina lutea [35].
The ether extract of Pleurotus sajor-caju showed high antibacterial activity against Staphylococcus aureus, whereas Staphylococcus epidermidis showed high sensitivity for the ethanol extract [33].
Overall, it should be pointed out that the most susceptible gram-positive bacteria
to mushroom inhibitory action are Staphylococos aureus, Bacillus cereus, and Bacillus subtilis. Agaricus bisporus [15], [32], [33], Agaricus bitorquis [15], Boletus edulis [31], [32], Cantharellus cibarius [31], [32], [37], Lentinus edodes [11], [50], [54], and different Cortinarius sp. [10] seem to be a good option to inhibit Staphylococos aureus, and in some cases, Bacillus cereus and Bacillus subtilis. Studies with microorganisms related to nosocomial infections and multiresistance
cases such as Enterococcus faecalis, Enterococcus faecium, and MRSA are scarce. Nevertheless, in the few studies available, Lentinus edodes [50] was reported to inhibit Enterococcus faecalis, Enterococcus faecium, and MRSA. The latter microorganism was also inhibited by Phellinus linteus [51] and Pleurotus ostreatus [50]. It is important to develop new studies with different mushroom species and, moreover,
with these microorganisms that are so problematic to human health.
Antimicrobial compounds from mushrooms
Most studies on mushrooms with antibacterial activity describe the action of its extracts
without identifying the compounds responsible for this activity. However, some compounds
have been described as active against gram-positive bacteria ([Table 2]). Five of these compounds are terpenes. Confluentin (1a), grifolin (1b), and neogrifolin (1c) from Albatrellus fletti showed activity against Bacillus cereus and Enterococcus faecalis. The best result was for Enterococcus faecalis (MIC 0.5 to 1.0 mg/mL) [56]. Ganomycin A and B (5 a, b), isolated from Ganoderma pfeifferi, showed activity against Bacillus subtilis, Micrococcus flavus, and Staphylococcus aureus (15–25 mm zones of inhibition at a concentration of 250 µg/mL [57].
A steroid, 3,11-dioxolanosta-8,24(Z)-diene-26-oic acid (2), was isolated from the Jahnoporus hirtus mushroom and revealed activity against Bacillus cereus and Enterococcus faecalis [56].
Four sesquiterpenes with antimicrobial activity were described. The enokipodins A,
B, C, and D (4a–d), isolated from the mycelium of Flammulina velutipes, with activity against Bacillus subtilis, but only enokipodins A and C showed activity against Staphylococcus aureus [58].
Oxalic acid (3), an organic acid, isolated from the mycelium of Lentinus edodes, showed activity against Bacillus cereus, Staphylococcus aureus, and Streptococcus faecalis [59].
Coloratin A (10), a benzoic acid derivative isolated from Xylaria intracolarata, inhibited Staphylococcus aureus [60].
Eight compounds anthraquinone derivatives were also reported due to their antibacterial
activities. 6-Methylxanthopurpurin-3-O-methyl ether (7), (1S,3S)-austrocortilutein (8a), (1S,3R)-austrocortilutein (8b), (1S,3S)-austrocortirubin (8c), and torosachrysone (8 d), isolated from the mushroom Cortinarius basirubencens, and physcion (9a), erythroglaucin (9b), and emodin (9c), isolated from other species of Cortinarius, were all effective against Staphylococcus aureus [10].
In addition to the LMW compounds already mentioned, several antimicrobial compounds
with HMW have also been described, in particular, proteins and peptides.
CSAP (Cordyceps sinensis antibacterial protein-N-terminal sequence ALATQHGAP), isolated from Cordyceps sinensis, showed strong activity against Staphylococcus aureus and poor activity against Bacillus subtilis. However, the antibacterial action of this protein was bacteriostatic [61].
The ribonuclease isolated from Pleurotus sajor-caju showed activity against Staphylococcus aureus, acting on RNA [62].
The peptide plectasin, isolated from Pseudoplectania nigrella, is a macromolecule belonging to the class of defensins, present in animals and plants,
which acts at the cell wall, more specifically in the synthesis of peptidoglycan.
This peptide showed activity against Bacillus cereus, Bacillus thuringiensis, Corynebacterium diphtheriae, Corynebacterium
jeikeium, Enterococcus faecalis, Enterococcus faecium, VREF, Staphylococcus aureus, MRSA, Staphylococcus epidermidis, MRSE, Streptococcus pneumonia, PRSP, and Streptococcus pyogenes. The in vitro action of plectasin against Streptococcus pneumoniae is comparable to the action of penicillin and vancomycin [63].
The peptides peptaibol boletusin, pepteibol chrysospermin 3, and peptaibol chrysospermin
5 (isolated from Boletus spp.) allow for the opening of pores for ion transport, and showed activity against Bacillus subtilis, Corynebacterium lilium, and Staphylococcus aureus. The peptaibol chrysospermin 3 also showed activity against Streptococcus sp. [64].
Fraction B from Pycnoporus sanguineus, obtained by Smânia et al. [42], whose main constituent is a phenoxazin-3-one-type pigment, showed activity against
Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus A, B, C, and G. Lower values of MIC were obtained against Streptococcus strains.
The mechanisms of action of most of the compounds described above are not available
in the literature.
Antimicrobial Activity Against Gram-Negative Bacteria
Antimicrobial Activity Against Gram-Negative Bacteria
Methodologies
The same methodologies already described for gram-positive bacteria are also used
in the evaluation of mushroom extracts or compounds antimicrobial activity against
gram-negative bacteria. The results are presented in [Tables 3] and [4].
Table 3 Mushroom extracts with antimicrobial activity against gram-negative bacteria.
|
Microorganism
|
Mushrooma
|
Results
|
References
|
|
aAcetone, chloroform, ethanol, ethyl acetate, methanol, dichloromethane, ether, xylene,
or water extracts. M – mycelium, the other samples refer to the fruiting body. The
antimicrobial activity is expressed in CFU (colony forming unities), MIC (minimal
inhibitory concentrations), IZD (internal zone diameter), or IC50 (concentrations inhibiting 50 % of the growth) values
|
|
Cupriavidis
|
Lentinus edodes
|
IZD = 15 mm
|
[50]
|
|
Enterobacter aerogenes
|
Agaricus bisporus, Clitocybe alexandri, Hygrophorus agathosmus, Meripilus giganteus (M), Paxillus involutus (M), Pleurotus ostreatus (M), Pleurotus sajor-caju, Rhizopogon roseolus, Suillus collitinus
|
IZD = 8–22 mm MIC = 15.62–125 µg/mL
|
[33], [35], [38], [44]
|
|
Enterobacter cloacae
|
Armillaria mellea, Clitocybe geotropa, Meripilus giganteus (M), Meripilus giganteus, Paxillus involutus (M), Pleurotus ostreatus (M), Sparassis crispa
|
IZD = 10–20 mm
|
[35], [36]
|
|
Enterobacter faecalis
|
Armillaria mellea, Clitocybe geotropa, Meripilus giganteus (M), Meripilus giganteus, Sparassis crispa
|
IZD = 8–14 mm
|
[35], [36]
|
|
Escherichia coli
|
Agaricus bisporus, Armillaria mellea (M), Armillaria mellea, Boletus edulis, Cantharellus cibarius, Clitocybe alexandri, Clitocybe
geotropa, Cortinarius sp., Ganoderma lucidum, Hydnum repandum, Irpex lacteus (M), Lactarius camphoratus, Lactarius delicious, Lactarius piperatus, Lactarius volemus,
Laetiporus sulphureus, Lentinus edodes, Lepista nuda, Leucoagaricus cf. cinereus (M), Macrolepiota procera, Marasmius sp. (M), Marasmius cf. bellus (M), Meripilus giganteus (M), Meripilus giganteus, Morchella costata (M), Morchella hortensis (M), Navesporus floccosa, Paxillus involutus (M), Phellinus rimosus, Pleurotus eryngii (M), Pleurotus ostreatus (M), Pleurotus sajor-caju, Rhizopogon roseolus, Sparassis crispa, Suillus collitinus
|
IZD = 8–27.40 ± 0.19 mm MIC = 250 µg/mL – > 50 mg/mL
|
[32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [38], [39], [40], [44], [46], [48], [49], [50], [54], [71]
|
|
Fusobacterium nucleatum
|
Lentinus edodes
|
CFU = 2.40 (± 3.11) × 102 – 7.56 (± 4.28) × 106
MIC = 0.9–20 mg/mL
|
[53], [54], [67]
|
|
Klebsiella aerogenes
|
Lentinus edodes
|
IZD = 9 mm
|
[50]
|
|
Klebsiella pneumoniae
|
Agaricus bisporus, Agaricus bitorquis, Ganoderma lucidum, Lactarius piperatus, Lentinus
edodes, Lepista nuda, Pleurotus sajor-caju, Ramaria flava
|
IZD = 4–31.60 ± 0.10 mm MIC = 0.5 mg/mL
|
[11], [15], [33], [39], [46], [47], [49], [50], [55]
|
|
Morganella morganii
|
Agaricus bisporus, Agaricus bitorquis, Agaricus essettei, Laetiporus sulphurous
|
IZD = 4.5 ± 0.5 mm
|
[15], [48]
|
|
Neisseria subflava
|
Lentinus edodes
|
CFU = 9.49 (± 2.60) × 106 – 1.50 (± 0,50)×108
|
[53], [67]
|
|
Porphyromonas gingivalis
|
Lentinus edodes
|
MIC = 0.05–10 mg/mL
|
[45]
|
|
Prevotella intermedia
|
Lentinus edodes
|
CFU = 2.00 (± 2.83) × 101 – 2.60 (± 6.66) × 105
MIC = 0.05–15 mg/mL
|
[53], [54], [67], [68]
|
|
Prevotella nigrescens
|
Lentinus edodes
|
MIC = 0.1–15 mg/mL
|
[54]
|
|
Proteus mirabilis
|
Lentinus edodes
|
IZD = 4 mm
|
[11]
|
|
Proteus vulgaris
|
Agaricus bisporus, Agaricus bitorquis, Armillaria mellea, Clitocybe geotropa, Laetiporus
sulphureus, Meripilus giganteus (M), Meripilus giganteus, Pleurotus ostreatus (M), Pleurotus sajor-caju, Sparassis crispa
|
IZD = 5.5 ± 0.5–19 mm
|
[15], [33], [35], [36], [48]
|
|
Pseudomonas aeruginosa
|
Agaricus bisporus, Boletus edulis, Cantharellus cibariusCortinarius sp., Cortinarius
abnormis, Cortinarius ardesiacus, Cortinarius archeri, Cortinarius austroalbidus,
Cortinarius austrovenetus, Cortinarius austroviolaceus, Cortinarius coelopus, Cortinarius
clelandii, Cortinarius [Dermocybe sp., Dermocybe canaria, Dermocybe kula], Cortinarius
fulvoiubatus, Cortinarius ianthinus, Cortinarius memoria-annae, Cortinarius persplendidus,
Cortinarius sinapicolor, Cortinarius submagellanicus, Cortinarius tricholomoides,
Cortinarius vinosipes, Ganoderma lucidum, Hydnum repandum, Lactarius camphoratus,
Lactarius delicious, Lactarius piperatus, Lactarius volemus, Laetiporus sulphureus,
Lentinus edodes, Lepista nuda, Macrolepiota procera, Navesporus floccosa, Phellinus
rimosus, Pleurotus sajor-caju, Ramaria flava
|
IZD = 6–20 mm MIC = 0.5–100 mg/mL IC50 = 0.04 – > 2.00 mg/mL
|
[10], [32], [33], [39], [40], [45], [46], [48], [49], [50]
|
|
Pseudomonas maltophila
|
Lentinus edodes
|
IZD = 6 mm
|
[11]
|
|
Salmonella enteritidis
|
Laetiporus sulphureus, Ramaria flava
|
IZD = 4–5 ± 1 mm
|
[37], [40]
|
|
Salmonella poona
|
Lentinus edodes
|
IZD = 9 mm
|
[50]
|
|
Salmonella typhi
|
Agaricus bisporus, Ganoderma lucidum, Pleurotus sajor-caju
|
IZD = 7.00 ± 0.18–20.60 ± 0.14 mm
|
[33], [39]
|
|
Salmonella typhimurium
|
Agaricus bisporus, Armillaria mellea (M), Armillaria mellea, Clitocybe geotropa, Ganoderma lucidum, Hygrophorus agathosmus,
Irpex lacteus (M), Lepista nuda, Meripilus giganteus (M), Meripilus giganteus, Morchella costata (M), Morchella elata (M), Morchella esculenta var. vulgaris (M), Morchella hortensis (M), Navesporus floccosa, Paxillus involutus (M), Phellinus rimosus, Pleurotus ostreatus (M), Pleurotus sajor-caju, Sparassis crispa, Suillus collitinus,
|
IZD = 6–16 mm MIC = 15.62–125 µg/mL
|
[33], [34], [35], [36], [40], [44], [49]
|
|
Serratia marcescens
|
Lentinus edodes
|
IZD = 10 mm
|
[50]
|
|
Veillonella dispar
|
Lentinus edodes
|
CFU = 1.37 (± 0.31)×107 – 2.35 (± 1.09)×107
|
[53], [67]
|
|
Veillonella parvula
|
Lentinus edodes
|
MIC = 0.3–20 mg/mL
|
[54]
|
|
Yersinia enterecolitica
|
Agaricus bitorquis, Laetiporus sulphureus, Lentinus edodes, Ramaria flava
|
IZD = 5–16 mm
|
[11], [15], [47]
|
Table 4 Mushroom compounds with antimicrobial activity against gram-negative bacteria.
|
Microorganism
|
Compound (mushroom)
|
Results
|
References
|
|
M – mycelium, the other samples refer to the fruiting body. The antimicrobial activity
is expressed in MIC (minimal inhibitory concentrations), IZD (internal zone diameter),
or IC50 (concentrations inhibiting 50 % of the growth) values
|
|
Achromobacter xyloxidans
|
6 (Leucopaxillus albissimus)
|
MIC = 32 µg/mL
|
[69]
|
|
Acinetobacter baumannii
|
6 (Leucopaxillus albissimus)
|
MIC = 128 µg/mL
|
[69]
|
|
Agrobacterium rhizogenes
|
Protein (Clitocybe sinopica)
|
MIC = 0.14 µM
|
[70]
|
|
Agrobacterium tumefaciens
|
Protein (Clitocybe sinopica)
|
MIC = 0.14 µM
|
[70]
|
|
Agrobacterium vitis
|
Protein (Clitocybe sinopica)
|
MIC = 0.28 µM
|
[70]
|
|
Burkholderia cenocepacia
|
6 (Leucopaxillus albissimus)
|
MIC = 16 µg/mL
|
[69]
|
|
Burkholderia cepacia
|
6 (Leucopaxillus albissimus)
|
MIC = 32 µg/mL
|
[69]
|
|
Burkholderia multivorans
|
6 (Leucopaxillus albissimus)
|
MIC = 16 µg/mL
|
[69]
|
|
Cytophaga johnsonae
|
6 (Leucopaxillus albissimus)
|
IZD = 16 mm
|
[69]
|
|
Escherichia coli
|
Proteins (Cordyceps sinensis); 5a, b (Ganoderma pfeifferi); Fraction B (Pycnoporus sanguineus); 10 (Xylaria intracolarata)
|
IZD = 4–16 mm MIC = 0.625 mg/mL–100 000 g/L
|
[42], [57], [60], [61]
|
|
Klebsiella pneumoniae
|
3 (Lentinus edodes M); Fraction B (Pycnoporus sanguineus); 10 (Xylaria intracolarata)
|
IZD = 12–22 mm MIC = 0.625 mg/mL
|
[42], [59], [60]
|
|
Proteus mirabilis
|
5a, b (Ganoderma pfeifferi)
|
IZD = 15 mm
|
[57]
|
|
Proteus vulgaris
|
Protein (Cordyceps sinensis); 3 (Lentinus edodes M)
|
IZD = 12 mm MIC = 75 000 g/L
|
[59], [61]
|
|
Pseudomonas aeruginosa
|
7, 8a-8 d (Cortinarius basirubencens); 9a–c (Cortinarius sp.); 3 (Lentinus edodes M); 6 (Leucopaxillus albissimus); Ribonuclease (Pleurotus sajor-caju); Fraction B (Pycnoporus sanguineus); 10 (Xylaria intracolarata)
|
IZD = 15–16 mm MIC = 128 µg/mL–1.250 mg/mL IC50 = 1.5–> 50 µg/mL IC50 = 51 ± 6 µM
|
[10], [42], [59], [62], [64], [68]
|
|
Pseudomonas fluorescens
|
3 (Lentinus edodes M); Ribonuclease (Pleurotus sajor-caju)
|
IZD = 13 mm IC50 = 186 ± 12 µM
|
[59], [62]
|
|
Serratia marcescens
|
5a, b (Ganoderma pfeifferi)
|
IZD = 15–16 mm
|
[57]
|
|
Salmonella enteritidis
|
10 (Xylaria intracolarata)
|
IZD = 16 mm
|
[60]
|
|
Salmonella typhi
|
Protein (Cordyceps sinensis); Fraction B (Pycnoporus sanguineus)
|
MIC = 0.312 mg/mL – 50 000 g/L
|
[42], [61]
|
|
Stenotrophomonas maltophilia
|
6 (Leucopaxillus albissimus)
|
MIC = 32 µg/mL
|
[69]
|
|
Xanthomonas malvacearum
|
Protein (Clitocybe sinopica)
|
MIC = 0.56 µM
|
[70]
|
|
Xanthomonas oryzae
|
Protein (Clitocybe sinopica)
|
MIC = 0.56 µM
|
[70]
|
Mushroom extracts with antimicrobial activity
The antimicrobial activity against gram-negative bacteria shown by different mushroom
extracts is not so extensive and is shown in [Table 3].
The results for Agaricus bisporus are contradictory. Barros et al. [31] and Öztürk et al. [15] found no activity against gram-negative bacteria, while Ozen et al. [32] and Tambeker et al. [33] reported positive activity mainly against Escherichia coli, but also against Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Enterobacter aerogenes, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Proteus vulgaris,
Salmonella typhi, and Salmonella typhimurium. However, these divergences may be due to different methods and concentrations used.
Agaricus bitorquis methanolic extract had some effects against three of the gram-negative bacteria,
namely Yersinia enterocolitica, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Proteus vulgaris [15]. Agaricus essettei, Agaricus silvicola, Agaricus silvaticus, and Agaricus cf. nigrecentulus did not show any antibacterial activity against gram-negative bacteria [15], [31], [34].
Ethanolic extracts of Armillaria mellea fruiting bodies revealed better antimicrobial activity than chloroform extracts and
mycelium extract upon gram-negative bacteria [35], [36].
According to Barros et al. [31], [37], Cantharellus cibarius showed no activity against gram-negative bacteria, as opposed to Ozen et al. [32], who reported there was activity against Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.
Enterobacter aerogenes and Escherichia coli were inhibited by the methanolic extract of Clitocybe alexandri [38]. Clitocybe geotropa chloroform and ethanolic extracts inhibited the growth of all gram-negative bacteria
tested, with Proteus vulgaris being the most sensitive [36].
Beatttie et al. [10] reported anti-Pseudomonas aeruginosa activity of the genus Cortinarius and its subgenus, Dermocybe (methanolic extracts). Four species were tested, namely C. abnormis, C. austroalbidus, C. [D. kula], C. persplendidus, and eleven Cortinarius collection samples not identified to the species level, obtaining IC50 values ≤ 0.09 mg/mL against P. aeruginosa.
The acetone extract from Ganoderma lucidum showed strong antibacterial activity, mainly against Klebsiella pneumonia [39]. Further studies indicate that the antimicrobial combination of G. lucidum extracts with chemotherapeutic agents (ampicillin, cefazolin, oxytetracycline, and
chloramphenicol) resulted in synergism or antagonism, with synergism observed when
combined with cefazolin against Bacillus subtilis and Klebsiella oxytoca [40], [65].
The mycelium extract from Leucoagaricus cf. cinereus, Marasmius cf. bellus, and Marasmius sp. were capable of inhibiting the growth of Escherichia coli. Within the family Tricholomataceae, species from the genus Marasmius have long been known to produce interesting secondary metabolites [66].
The Hydnum repandum methanolic extract was mainly active against Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Escherichia coli was found to be the most sensitive bacteria to methanolic extracts of Lactarius species [32]. However, no activity of Lactarius delicious against E. coli was observed [45], [46].
The Laetiporus sulphureus ethanolic extract had a lower antibacterial spectrum against gram-negative bacteria,
having no activity against Klebsiella pneumonia [48].
On three occasions, namely with the Pseudomonas sp., Lentinus edodes aqueous extract was significantly more active than ciprofloxacin (positive control),
whereby it gave markedly greater zones of inhibition. This result is of important
clinical significance, as P. aeruginosa is emerging as a major etiological of the nosocomial infection [50]. L. edodes mycelium had no effect on Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas fluorescens, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Camphylobacter jejuni [52].
Extracts from Lentinus edodes showed a strong bactericidal effect against Prevotella intermedia, which is associated with gingivitis. This mushroom was capable of significantly
reducing dental plaque deposition [53], [54], [67], [68].
The Lepista nuda methanolic extract was effective against Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa [49].
Tambeker et al. [33] reported the antimicrobial ability of several extracts of Pleurotus sajor-caju. Escherichia coli, Enterococcus aerogenes, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Klebsiella pneumoniae were most sensitive to ethanolic, methanolic, and xylene extracts.
Overall, among the tested gram-negative bacteria, Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae are the most susceptible to mushroomsʼ inhibitory effect. Agaricus bisporus [32], [33], Lentinus edodes [50], [54], Ganoderma lucidum [39], [40], and Lepista nuda [49] seem to have higher antimicrobial activity against those microorganisms. Pseudomonas aeruginosa was inhibited by Clitocybe alexandri [38], Boletus edulis, Cantharellus cibarius [32], Ganoderma lucidum [39], and Cortinarius sp. [10] extracts. Studies with Enterobacter aerogenes and Serratia marcescens are scarce, and due to the importance in the area of multiresistance, they should
be carrried out to assess sensibility to extracts from mushroom species.
Antimicrobial compounds from mushrooms
Some of the compounds previously discussed have also been described for their action
against gram-negative bacteria ([Table 4]).
Terpenes 5a and 5b, isolated from Ganoderma pfeifferi, showed moderate activity against Escherichia coli, Proteus mirabilis, and Serratia marcescens [57].
The organic acid 3, isolated from the mycelium of Lentinus edodes, showed activity against Klebsiella pneumoniae, Proteus vulgaris, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Pseudomonas fluorescens [59].
The benzoic acid derivative 10, isolated from Xylaria intracolarata, showed activity against Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumonia, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Salmonella enteritidis. For this compound, the highest inhibition (22 mm) was found in Klebsiella pneumonia, which is higher than the control (gentamicin, 14 mm) [60].
Compounds 7, 8a–d (Cortinarius basirubescens), and 9a–c (Cortinarius spp.) were effective against Pseudomonas aeruginosa [10].
The quinoline 6, isolated from Leucopaxillus albissimus, showed activity against Achromobacter xyloxidans, Acinetobacter baumannii, Burkholderia cenocepacia, Burkholderia
cepacia, Burkholderia multivorans, Cytophaga johnsonae, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Among the thirteen microorganisms tested, Cytophaga johnsonae was the most strongly inhibited (16 mm) [69].
Some proteins have also been reported against gram-negative bacteria. The protein
CSAP, isolated from Cordyceps sinensis and already mentioned above, showed activity against Escherichia coli, Proteus vulgaris, and Salmonella typhi [61], while the protein (N-terminal sequence SVQATVNGDKML) isolated from Clitocybe sinopica was active against Agrobacterium rhizogenes, Agrobacterium tumefaciens, Agrobacterium vitis, Xanthomonas
malvacearum, and Xanthomonas oryzae [70].
Ribonuclease (Pleurotus sajor-caju) showed activity against Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Pseudomonas fluorescens, acting at the RNA level [62].
Fraction B (Pycnoporus sanguineus) showed activity against Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Salmonella typhi [42].
Unfortunatly, the mechanism of action of each one of the isolated compounds is not
completly clear and described in the available reports.
Concluding Remarks
The present review focuses on the antimicrobial effects of mushrooms from all over
the world, and their isolated compounds. It will certainly be useful for future scientific
studies. Both edible and nonedible mushrooms showed antimicrobial activity against
pathogenic microorganisms, including bacteria associated with nosocomial infections
(Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Pseudomonas maltophila, Listeria monocytogenes, Staphylococcus
aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Morganella morganii, Proteus mirabilis, Serratia marcescens) and multiresistance (MRSA, MRSE, VREF, PRSP, ERSP).
Data available from the literature indicates that mushroom extracts and isolated compounds
exhibit higher antimicrobial activity against gram-positive than gram-negative bacteria.
Among all the mushrooms, Lentinus edodes is the best-studied species and seems to possess broad antimicrobial action against
both gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria. Species from the genera Boletus, Ganoderma, and Lepista appear promising for future studies, if one considers the positive activity and limited
number of publications. Considering the low number of studies with individual compounds,
Plectasin peptide, isolated from Pseudoplectania nigrella, revealed the highest antimicrobial activity against gram-positive bacteria.
The comparison of the results reported by different authors is difficult, due to the
diverse methodologies used to evaluate antimicrobial activity of mushroom extracts
or isolated compounds. Therefore, the standardization of methods and establishment
of cut-off values is urgent. The knowledge about the mechanisms of action of different
compounds might lead to the discovery of new active principles for antimicrobial activity.
Furthermore, the application of cytotoxicity assays is also important to evaluate
the effects on humans in the range of the in vitro tested concentrations.
The research on mushrooms is extensive and hundreds of species have demonstrated a
broad spectrum of pharmacological activities, including antimicrobial activity. Although
there are a number of studies available in the literature, they are almost entirely
focused on the screening of antibacterial properties of mushroom extracts. In fact,
there is a gap in the identification of the individual compounds responsible for those
properties, and only a few low-molecular weight compounds and some peptides and proteins
have been described. After elucidation of their mechanism of action, these mushroom
metabolites or other related compounds could be used to develop nutraceuticals or
drugs effective against pathogenic microorganisms resistant to conventional treatments.
Acknowledgments
This work was funded by Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT, Portugal) and
COMPETE/QREN/EU (research project PTDC/AGR-ALI/110062/2009; CIMO strategic project
PEst-OE/AGR/UI0690/2011 and project PEst-OE/EQB/LA0016/2011. It was also supported
by CHTAD – Hospital Center of Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro and Siemens.