Table 2 Observed antibacterial interaction between essential oil pairs predicted as synergistic.

From: In vitro and in silico prediction of antibacterial interaction between essential oils via graph embedding approach

Essential oilA

Essential oilB

Probability

MICA

MICB

MICmix

FICI

Synergistic

Antagonistic

(mg/mL)

(mg/mL)

(mg/mL)

C. citratus

O. compactum

0.669

0.075

0.83

0.5

0.5

0.80 (N)

O. compactum

M. balsamum

0.629

0.161

0.5

 > 4

1

1.0–1.1 (N)

C. citratus

M. balsamum

0.607

0.123

0.83

 > 4

2

1.2–1.5 (N)

O. compactum

T. ammi

0.585

0.190

0.5

0.5

0.25

0.50 (S)

T. vulgare

O. compactum

0.584

0.182

0.5

0.5

0.5

1.0 (N)

C. citratus

T. ammi

0.565

0.146

0.83

0.5

0.4

0.64 (N)

T. vulgare

C. citratus

0.562

0.140

0.5

0.83

0.5

0.80 (N)

T. ammi

L. petersonii

0.541

0.159

0.5

1

0.5

0.75 (N)

T. vulgare

L. petersonii

0.538

0.152

0.5

1

1

1.5 (N)

C. citratus

T. dolabrata

0.537

0.111

0.83

0.5

0.125

0.20 (S)

C. grevei

M. balsamum

0.535

0.190

1

 > 4

 > 4

 > 2.5 (A/N)

C. verum

O. compactum

0.504

0.280

0.5

0.5

0.5

1.0 (N)

C. verum

C. citratus

0.497

0.218

0.5

0.83

0.25

0.40 (S)

L. petersonii

Z. officinale

0.487

0.132

1

 > 4

2

1.0–1.3 (N)

T. ammi

Z. officinale

0.415

0.285

0.5

 > 4

0.25

0.25–0.28 (S)

T. vulgare

Z. officinale

0.415

0.274

0.5

 > 4

0.5

0.50–0.56 (N)

  1. The FICI was interpreted as S: synergistic (FICI ≤ 0.5); N: no interaction (0.5 < FICI < 4); A: antagonistic (FICI ≥ 4). Observed synergistic interactions are highlighted in bold.
  2. MICmix denotes a summation of two oil concentratations in a mixture. C. citratus: Cymbopogon citratus, O. compactum: Origanum compactum, M. balsamum: Myroxylon balsamum var. pereirae, T. ammi: Trachyspermum ammi, T. vulgaris: Thymus vulgaris ct. thymol, L. petersonii: Leptospermum petersonii, T. dolabrata: Thujopsis dolabrata, C. grevei: Cedrelopsis grevei, C. verum: Cinnamomum verum, Z. officinale: Zingiber officinale.
Back to article page