## 3 Results and Discussion
### Influence of C. cardunculus Extracts on Bacterial Growth
#### 3.2.1 Antimicrobial Activity of C. cardunculus
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Strains**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Origin**} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Zone of Inhibition, mm**} \\ \cline{3-8}  & & **CL** & **CI** & **CA** & **RA** & **C\(-\)** & **C\(+\)** \\ \hline _Pseudomonas fluorescens_ ESACB 2 & Sheep’s raw milk & NI & NI & 8.15 \(\pm\) 0.09 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 8.85 \(\pm\) 0.09 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 9.08 \(\pm\) 0.06 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & NI \\ _Aclaligenes faecalis_ ESACB 7 & Cow’s raw milk & NI & NI & 8.48 \(\pm\) 0.07 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 8.95 \(\pm\) 0.04 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 8.28 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & NI \\ _Pseudomonas putida_ ESACB 27 & Goat’s cheese mid & NI & NI & 6.48 \(\pm\) 0.06 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 6.58 \(\pm\) 0.08 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 8.27 \(\pm\) 0.04 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & NI \\ _Pseudomonas putida_ ESACB 29 & Water & NI & NI & 6.73 \(\pm\) 0.05 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 7.28 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 7.14 \(\pm\) 0.04 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & NI \\ _Pseudomonas fluorescens_ ESACB 67 & Goat’s raw milk & NI & NI & 7.65 \(\pm\) 0.05 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 7.28 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 7.69 \(\pm\) 0.04 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & NI \\ _Pseudomonas fluorescens_ ESACB 137 & Washing car & NI & NI & 8.04\(\pm\)0.11\({}^{\text{a}}\) & 8.03 \(\pm\) 0.10 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 8.28 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & NI \\ _Pseudomonas putida_ ESACB 184 & Sheep’s raw milk & NI & NI & 7.36 \(\pm\) 0.04 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 7.28 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 9.08 \(\pm\) 0.06 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & NI \\ _Pseudomonas putida_ ESACB 191 & Goat’s cheese mid & NI & NI & 8.18 \(\pm\) 0.10 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 7.27 \(\pm\) 0.08 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 8.28 \(\pm\) 0.10 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & NI \\ _Pseudomonas aeruginosa_ ESACB 217 & Water & NI & NI & 6.44 \(\pm\) 0.04 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 6.67 \(\pm\) 0.06 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 6.34 \(\pm\) 0.21 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & NI \\ _Pseudomonas aeruginosa_ ESA 1 & Cow’s raw milk & NI & NI & 8.28 \(\pm\) 0.07 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 8.08 \(\pm\) 0.09 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 8.38 \(\pm\) 0.07 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & NI \\ _Pseudomonas aeruginosa_ ESA 2 & Cow’s raw milk & NI & NI & 8.73 \(\pm\) 0.09 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 8.93 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & NI & NI \\ _Pseudomonas aeruginosa_ ATCC 27853 & - & NI & NI & 8.58 \(\pm\) 0.06 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 8.79 \(\pm\) 0.09 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 8.55 \(\pm\) 0.05 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & NI \\ _Pseudomonas fluorescens_ ATCC 13525 & - & NI & NI & 7.96 \(\pm\) 0.12 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 8.03 \(\pm\) 0.09 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 8.08 \(\pm\) 0.06 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & NI \\ _Staphylococcus aureus_ ATCC 25923 & - & NI & NI & NI & 8.12 \(\pm\) 0.09 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 8.23 \(\pm\) 0.65 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & NI \\ _Listeria monocytogenes_ NCTC 11994 & - & NI & NI & 7.73 \(\pm\) 0.24 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 6.93 \(\pm\) 0.65 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 8.08 \(\pm\) 0.06 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & NI \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Antimicrobial activity of _C. cardunculus_ extracts measured by the inhibition zone (mm) of: CL—Leaves decoction, CI—Influorescence decoction, and standard compounds, CA—chlorogenic and RA—rosmarinic acids; C\(-\) is the negative control (0.001 mg/mL chloramphenicol), C\(+\) is the positive control (distilled and sterilized water). The antimicrobial agents were tested at a concentration of 1 mg/mL NI—No Inhibition. Different superscript letters in the same line correspond to statistically different values (\(p\leq 0.05\)). _C. cardunculus_ inflorescence and leaves extracts were described as having antibacterial activity [13; 24; 25]. However, these studies used _C. cardunculus_ extracts extracted with organic solvents such as ethanol and methanol among others. The extracts tested were extracted with water, so they are complete extracts where several phenolic and flavonoid compounds are present, as well as mucilage, making the proportion of active compounds lower than the extracts used in other studies. This is why the results showed antimicrobial activity by CA, whereas the main compound of CL (Table 1) and CL showed no antimicrobial activity.