Volume 12, Issue 1 (January-Fabruary 2018)
IJT 2018, 12(1): 33-37 |
Back to browse issues page
1- MSc of Applied Chemistry, Member of Young Researchers and Elite Club, Urmia Branch, Islamic Azad university, urmia, Iran. , kouhkanmaryam@gmail.com
2- Department of Biology, Urmia Branch, Islamic Azad University, Urmia, Iran.
3- Department of Microbiology, Urmia Branch, Islamic Azad University, Urmia, Iran.
2- Department of Biology, Urmia Branch, Islamic Azad University, Urmia, Iran.
3- Department of Microbiology, Urmia Branch, Islamic Azad University, Urmia, Iran.
Abstract: (3766 Views)
Background: In this study, we evaluated antibacterial and antifungle activity of these derivatives against gram positive (Staphylococcus aureus, Bacillus subtilis, B. cereus), gram negative (Proteus vulgaris) bacteria and fungale (Candida albicans, C. tropicalis and C. glabrata).
Methods: The broth macro dilution and well agar diffusion methods were used for determination of inhibition zoom (IZ) and minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) during preliminary evaluation of antimicrobial activity.
Results: The (MIC) values of tested compounds revealed that all compounds were active against Staphylococcus oureus and exhibited the same antibacterial activity in comparison to ceftizoxim (MIC=125µg/mL). The results of antifungal screening showed that all the compounds were potent antimicrobial activity against tested pathogenic fungi (MIC=250 to1000 µg/ml). Compounds (6a) and (6b) showed the maximum activity with MIC value of 250 µg/ml against all tested fungi, but compound (6h) showed poor antifungal activity against all fungi. MIC values for title compounds were similar to MIC results for fluconazol.
Conclusions: All the compounds are potent antifungal and antibacterial activity against tested microorganism.
Methods: The broth macro dilution and well agar diffusion methods were used for determination of inhibition zoom (IZ) and minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) during preliminary evaluation of antimicrobial activity.
Results: The (MIC) values of tested compounds revealed that all compounds were active against Staphylococcus oureus and exhibited the same antibacterial activity in comparison to ceftizoxim (MIC=125µg/mL). The results of antifungal screening showed that all the compounds were potent antimicrobial activity against tested pathogenic fungi (MIC=250 to1000 µg/ml). Compounds (6a) and (6b) showed the maximum activity with MIC value of 250 µg/ml against all tested fungi, but compound (6h) showed poor antifungal activity against all fungi. MIC values for title compounds were similar to MIC results for fluconazol.
Conclusions: All the compounds are potent antifungal and antibacterial activity against tested microorganism.
Keywords: Amino Thiazol, Antimicrobial Activity, Antifungl Activity, Minimum Inhibitory Concentration
References
1. Sharma M, Singh S, Sharma S. New Generation Antibiotics/Antibacterials: Deadly Arsenal for Disposal of Antibiotic Resistant Bacteria. J Microb Biochem Technol 2015;7:374-9. [DOI:10.4172/1948-5948.1000241]
2. Prajapati AK, Modi VP. Synthesis and biological activity of n-{5-(4-methylphenyl) diazenyl-4-phenyl-1, 3-thiazol-2-yl} benzamide derivatives. Quím Nova 2011;34(5):771-4.
3. Nassar E. Synthesis,(in vitro) antitumor and antimicrobial activity of some pyrazoline, pyridine, and pyrimidine derivatives linked to indole moiety. J Am Sci 2010;6(8):338-47.
4. Azarifar D, Shaebanzadeh M. Synthesis and characterization of new 3, 5-dinaphthyl substituted 2-pyrazolines and study of their antimicrobial activity. Molecules 2002;7(12):885-95. [DOI:10.3390/71200885]
5. Tomita K, Tsuzuki Y, Shibamori K, Tashima M, Kajikawa F, Sato, Y, Kashimoto S, Chiba K, Hino K. Synthesis and structure-activity relationships of novel 7-substituted 1,4-dihydro4-oxo-1-(2-thiazolyl)-1,8-naphthyridine-3-carboxylic acids as antitumor agents. J Med Chem 2002; 45(25): 5564-75. [DOI:10.1021/jm010057b]
6. Karabasanagouda T, Adhikari AV, Dhanwad R, Parameshwarappa G. Synthesis of some new 2-(4-alkylthiophenoxy)-4-substituted-1, 3-thiazoles as possible anti-inflammatory and antimicrobial agents. Indian J Chem 2008;47B (01):144-52.
7. Khan KM, Ambreen N, Karim A, Saied S, Amyn A, Ahmed A, Perveen S. Schiff Bases of Thiazole as Antibacterial and Antifungal Agents. J Pharmacy Res 2012;5(1): 651-6.
8. Amir M, Kumar H, Khan SA. Synthesis and pharmacological evaluation of pyrazoline derivatives as new anti-inflammatory and analgesic agents. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 2008;18(3):918-22. [DOI:10.1016/j.bmcl.2007.12.043]
9. Panico AM, Geronikaki A, Mgonzo R, Cardile, V, Gentile B. Doytchinova I, Aminothiazole derivatives with antidegenerative activity on cartilage. Bioorg Med Chem 2003; 11(13):2983-9. [DOI:10.1016/S0968-0896(03)00149-4]
10. Pattan SR, Bukitagar AA, Pattan JS, Kapadnis B, Jadhav S. Synthesis and evaluation of some new substituted phenylthiazole derivatives and their antitubercular activity. Indian J Chem 2009;48:1033-7. [DOI:10.1002/chin.200947097]
11. Sutariya B, Raziya SK, Mohan S, Sambasiva SV. Synthesis and antimicrobial activity of some new 2-substituted aminothiazoles. Indian J Chem 2007;46B(05): 884-7. [DOI:10.1002/chin.200736113]
12. Kouhkan M, HoseyniNazani N, Souldozi A, Zardashti Mand Darabi N. Green synthesis and preliminary pharmacological evaluation of three-substituted thiazide derivatives as antibacterial agents. JCPR 2015; 8(5):149-54.
13. Souldozi A. Efficient one-pot three-component reaction for the synthesis of (5-aryl-1,3,4-oxadiazol-2-yl)(pyridin-2-yl)methanol derivatives. J Chem Res 2015; 39:177-9. [DOI:10.3184/174751915X14249664363057]
14. Karimi F, Souldozi A, Hoseyni-Jazani N. One-pot synthesis of 2-aryl-1,3,4-oxadiazole derivatives as potential antibacterial agents. JCPR 2015; 7(10):1028-33.
15. RamezanAli A, AliMehrabi T, MohammadJavad HS, Khadijeh M, MahdiGhorbananli Z. A method for antibiotic susceptibility testing: applicable and accurate. Jundishapur J Microbiol 2012;2012(1):341-5.
16. Delahaye C, Rainford L, Nicholson A, Mitchell S, Lindo J, Ahmad M. Antibacterial and antifungal analysis of crude extracts from the leaves of Callistemon viminalis. J Med Biol Sci 2009;3(1):1-7.
17. Fehri LF, Wróblewski H, Blanchard A. Activities of antimicrobial peptides and synergy with enrofloxacin against Mycoplasma pulmonis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2007;51(2):468-74. [DOI:10.1128/AAC.01030-06]
18. Masomi F, Hassanshahian M. Antimicrobial Activity of Five Medicinal Plants on Candida Albicans. IJT 2016;10(6): 39-43.
19. Sedighinia F, Afshar AS. Antibacterial activity of Glycyrrhiza glabra against oral pathogens: an in vitro study. Avicenna J Phytomed 2012;2(3):118-24.
20. Moses I, Maduagwu U, Osazuwa E. Evaluation of the Antifungal Activity ofAqueous and Alcoholic Extracts of Six Spices. Am J Plant Sci 2016; 7:118-25. [DOI:10.4236/ajps.2016.71013]
21. Warn PA, Sharp A, Parmar A, Majithiya J, Denning DW, Hope WW. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of a novel triazole, isavuconazole: Mathematical modeling, importance of tissue concentrations, and impact of immune status on antifungal effect. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2009; 53(8): 3453-61. [DOI:10.1128/AAC.01601-08]
22. Jalali M, Mahdavi M, Memarian H, Ranjbar M, Soleymani M, Fassihi A, et al. Antimicrobial evaluation of some novel derivatives of 3, 4-dihydropyrimidine-2 (1H)-one. Res Pharm Sci 2012;7(4):243-4.
23. Ghasemi B, Najimi M. Antibacterial effect of thiazole derivatives on Rhodoccocus equi, Brucella abortus, and Pasteurella multocida. Iran J Vet Med 2016;10(1):47-52.
24. Lv P-C, Wang K-R, Yang Y, Mao W-J, Chen J, Xiong J, et al. Design, synthesis and biological evaluation of novel thiazole derivatives as potent FabH inhibitors. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 2009;19(23):6750-4. [DOI:10.1016/j.bmcl.2009.09.111]
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |