Evaluation Of Antimicrobial Activity And Resistance Pattern Of Commercial Household Biocides
Subscribe to read and download this work.
ABSTRACT
To access the role of biocide in the environment and the impact of biocide resistance, a panel of biocides was evaluated for antimicrobial activity and biocide resistance patterns. Equally, plants with traditionally acclaimed biocidal activities were accessed. The samples were subjected to Disc susceptibility testing, minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and time-kill determination. Majority of the population use household commercial biocides including benzalkonium chloride, sodium hypochlorite, sodium carbonate, chlorophenol, choroxylenol and ammonium as well as isoprppyl alcohol and other respective combinations. Preliminary data on zone of inhibition at 1mg/L(v/v) against standard E. coli and S. aureus strains for benzalkonium (Harpic®), sodium hypochlorite( Jik®), chloroxylenol (Dettol®) and chlorophenol (Ivy fectant®) were all resistant at < 19mm S. aureus except dettol and Izal, including Izal towards E. coli >17mm respectively. Xylopia was the only botanical that showed biocidial activity against E.coli >18mm. Xylopia, Azadiracha and Vernonia only showed moderate antistaphylococcal activity at high MIC value (1,024mg/L). Comparatively, Izal B had the highest to moderate inhibition effect against E. coli in the following manner Izal> Harpic > Dettol > Jik at 0 hr, while Ivy detergent didnt show biocidal activity at 0 hr contact both at MIC or double MIC value. The double MIC biocide-bacterial time-kill effects were very pronounced and consistent among all the biocides suggesting that higher effect of biocides could only be enjoyed at higher concentrations and longer time contact with the oragnism. This suggests that when applying household biocide, high concentration and more time factor is needed in other to act on the applied area and to achieve inhibition of bacterial growth. The fact that biocides are used extensively in many different products and concentration contribute largely to its efficacy, while at lower dosage usage and less time contact, it remain inactive allowing the organisms to overcome the effect and thereby contribute to bacterial resistance.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page ﾿ i
Certification ﾿ ii
Dedication ﾿ iii
Acknowledgement ﾿ iv
Table of Contents ﾿ v
List of Tables ﾿ vi
List of Figures ﾿ vii
Abstract ﾿ viii
CHAPTER ONE 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION ﾿ 1
1.1 Examples showing links between Antibiotic and Biocide Resistance ﾿ 2
1.2What is Biocide? 6
1.3 What is Resistance? 6
1.4 What is biocide resistance? 6
1.5 Mechanisms of biocide resistance 7
1.6 Mechanisms of intrinsic bacterial resistance to biocide 8
1.7 Mechanism of acquired bacterial resistance to biocides 10
1.8 Common resistance mechanism of both biocide and Antibiotic 11
1.1.1 Research Justification 13
1.1.2 Aim and Objectives of the study 14
CHAPTER TWO ﾿ 15
2.0 Literature Review ﾿ 15
2.1 chemicals used as ingredient in biocide ﾿ 16
2.2 Jik 17
2.3 Dettol 18
2.4 Nittol 18
2.5 Harpic Active fresh 19
2.2.1 Ivy’s Antiseptic 20
2.2.2 Dettol hand sanitizer and Mum and me hand gel 21
2.2.3 Izal (Z Germicie) 21
2.2.4 Botany of plants investidated for biocidal activity 22
2.2.5 Ricinus communis 22
2.2.6 Jatrophy curcas L. 23
2.2.7Azadirachta indica (Neem) 24
2.2.8 Vernonia amydalina 26
2.2.9 Piper guineense 27
2.3 Xylopia aethiopica 28
2.4 Cassia alata 28
2.5Thinlayer chromatography ﾿ 29 ﾿
CHAPTER THREE ﾿ 31
3.0 MATERIALS AND METHODS ﾿ 31 ﾿
3.1 Study Area ﾿ 31
3.2 Biocide/ Plant collection and identification ﾿ 31
3.3 Preparation of extracts ﾿ 31
3.4 Preparation of Biocides ﾿ 32
3.5 Diameter zone of inhibition determination of the biocides ﾿ 33
3.6 Preparation of test organism ﾿ 33
3.7 Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) determination ﾿ 33
3.8 Determination of Time – kill curve method ﾿ 34
3.9 Thin layer chromatography ﾿ 35
CHAPTER FOUR ﾿ 36
4.0 RESULT ﾿ 36
4.1 Antimicrobial activity of the household biocide 36
4.2 Result of MIC determination of biocides and plant extracts ﾿ 40
4.3 Effect of time- kill determination of the biocides 42
4.4 Thin layer chromatography (TLC) ﾿ 44
CHAPTER FIVE ﾿ 47
5.0 DICUSSION AND CONCLUSION 47 ﾿
5.1 Discussions ﾿ 47
5.2 Conclusion ﾿ 49
5.3 Recommendation ﾿ 51
References
Appendix: Abstract and certificate of scientific presentation
Reviews
No reviews yet.
APA
Oluchi, M. (2021). Evaluation Of Antimicrobial Activity And Resistance Pattern Of Commercial Household Biocides. Michael Okpara University of Agriculture. Retrieved June 7, 2026, from http://repository.mouau.edu.ng/works/evaluation-of-antimicrobial-activity-and-resistance-pattern-of-commercial-household-biocides-7-2
MLA
Oluchi, Maryjane. "Evaluation Of Antimicrobial Activity And Resistance Pattern Of Commercial Household Biocides." Michael Okpara University of Agriculture, 12 Jan. 2021, http://repository.mouau.edu.ng/works/evaluation-of-antimicrobial-activity-and-resistance-pattern-of-commercial-household-biocides-7-2. Accessed June 7, 2026.
Chicago
Oluchi, Maryjane. "Evaluation Of Antimicrobial Activity And Resistance Pattern Of Commercial Household Biocides." Michael Okpara University of Agriculture (2021). Accessed June 7, 2026. http://repository.mouau.edu.ng/works/evaluation-of-antimicrobial-activity-and-resistance-pattern-of-commercial-household-biocides-7-2