4.6 Review

Traditional uses, phytochemistry and pharmacology of Ficus carica: A review

Journal

PHARMACEUTICAL BIOLOGY
Volume 52, Issue 11, Pages 1487-1503

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3109/13880209.2014.892515

Keywords

Biological activities; ethnomedicne; fig

Funding

  1. Indian Council of Medical Research, New Delhi

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Context: Ficus carica Linn (Moraceae) has been used in traditional medicine for a wide range of ailments related to digestive, endocrine, reproductive, and respiratory systems. Additionally, it is also used in gastrointestinal tract and urinary tract infection. Objective: This review gathers the fragmented information available in the literature regarding morphology, ethnomedicinal applications, phytochemistry, pharmacology, and toxicology of Ficus carica. It also explores the therapeutic potential of Ficus carica in the field of ethnophytopharmacology. Materials and methods: All the available information on Ficus carica was compiled from electronic databases such as Academic Journals, Ethnobotany, Google Scholar, PubMed, Science Direct, Web of Science, and library search. Results: Worldwide ethnomedical uses of Ficus carica have been recorded which have been used traditionally for more than 40 types of disorders. Phytochemical research has led to the isolation of primary as well as secondary metabolites, plant pigment, and enzymes (protease, oxidase, and amylase). Fresh plant materials, crude extracts, and isolated components of Ficus carica have shown a wide spectrum of biological (pharmacological) activities. Conclusion: Ficus carica has emerged as a good source of traditional medicine for the treatment of various ailments such as anemia, cancer, diabetes, leprosy, liver diseases, paralysis, skin diseases, and ulcers. It is a promising candidate in pharmaceutical biology for the development/formulation of new drugs and future clinical uses.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available