4.7 Article

Antibacterial and anticandidal screening of Tunisian Citrullus colocynthis Schrad. from Medenine

期刊

JOURNAL OF ETHNOPHARMACOLOGY
卷 125, 期 2, 页码 344-349

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jep.2009.04.025

关键词

Citrullus colocynthis Schrad.; Aqueous extract; Acetone extract; Antibacterial; Anticandidal; Tunisia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ethnopharmacological relevance: Resistance to current antibacterial drugs and the rise of opportunistic fungal infections are growing global concerns. Traditional medicine is a potential source of new antibacterials and antifungals. Citrullus colocynthis Schrad. (Cucurbitaceae) endemic in Southern Tunisia, is used in folk medicine against dermatological, gynaecological and pulmonary infections. Aim of study. To assess in vitro antibacterial and anticandidal activity of aqueous and diluted acetone extracts of Citrullus colocynthis Schrad. MIC and MBC/MFC were determined for plant organs at different maturation stages. Materials and methods: Citrullus colocynthis Schrad. was harvested and its identification was verified. Aqueous and diluted acetone extracts (from the plant's roots, stems, leaves and three maturation stages of its fruit and seeds) were screened for activity against Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria (Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus aureus and Enterococcus faecalis)-and various Candida spp. (Candida glabrata, Candida albicans, Candida parapsilosis and Candida kreusei). Results: All extracts showed activity against all strains. The highest MICs and MBCs/MFCs were obtained from the fruit aqueous extracts (MIC 0.10 mg/ml against Candida albicans and Candida glabrata, 0.20 mg/ml against Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa), lowest activity from the root extracts. Conclusions: Citrullus colocynthis Schrad. shows antibacterial and anticandidal properties. The folk medicinal use as a broad-spectrum antimicrobial agent is validated. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据