4.5 Article

Nanoemulsions with oleoresin of Copaifera reticulata (Leguminosae) improve anthelmintic efficacy in the control of monogenean parasites when compared to oleoresin without nanoformulation

期刊

JOURNAL OF FISH DISEASES
卷 43, 期 6, 页码 687-695

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jfd.13168

关键词

antiparasitic activity; aquaculture; nanotechnology; toxicity; treatment

资金

  1. Embrapa
  2. National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) [303013/2015-0]
  3. Sao Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) [2018/20482-3]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study compared the in vitro anthelmintic activity of Copaifera reticulata oleoresin (200, 400, 600, 800 and 1,000 mg/L) and of nanoemulsions prepared with this oleoresin (50, 100, 150, 200 and 250 mg/L) against monogeneans on the gills of Colossoma macropomum. The major compounds present in the oleoresin of C. reticulata were gamma-macrocarpene (14.2%), alpha-bergamotene (13.6%), beta-selinene (13.4%) and beta-caryophyllene (11.7%). All concentrations of the nanoemulsion and the oleoresin without nanoformulation showed anthelmintic efficacy against monogeneans, and higher concentrations led to more rapid parasite mortality. Structural damages to the tegument of the parasites exposed to C. reticulata oleoresin were observed with scanning electron microscopy. At two hours of exposure, fish showed 100% tolerance to all nanoemulsion concentrations used in the in vitro assays, whereas 100% mortality was shown in the fish exposed to the oleoresin without nanoformulation after one hour. The results of this study suggest that nanoemulsions with oleoresin of C. reticulata have advantages in the control and treatment of monogenean infections in C. macropomum when compared to the oleoresin without nanoformulation. In addition, since nanoemulsions with the C. reticulata oleoresin are safe to control monogeneans, the efficacy of these nanoformulations may be assayed in therapeutic baths to treat C. macropomum infected by monogeneans.

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

4.5
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