4.7 Article

Antibacterial, anti-inflammatory, anti-cholinesterase and mutagenic effects of extracts obtained from some trees used in South African traditional medicine

期刊

JOURNAL OF ETHNOPHARMACOLOGY
卷 102, 期 3, 页码 457-464

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jep.2005.08.049

关键词

antibacterial activity; anti-inflammatory activity; acetylcholinesterase inhibitory activity; genotoxicity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Extracts obtained from 10 trees used in South African traditional medicine were screened for antibacterial, anti-inflammatory (COX-1 and COX-2) and anti-cholinesterase activities and investigated for potential mutagenic effects using the Ames test. Antibacterial activity was detected using the disc-diffusion and micro-dilution assays. The extracts were tested against Gram-positive bacteria: Bacillus subtilis, Staphylococcus aureus, Micrococcus luteus and Gram-negative bacteria: Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae. Of the 78 different plant extracts investigated, 80% showed activity against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria in the disc-diffusion assay. In the micro-dilution assay, 60% of the plant extracts showed minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) values <= 1.56 mg ml(-1). The lowest MIC value (0.092 mg ml(-1)) was recorded for an ethyl acetate root extract of Acacia sieberiana against Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli. In the anti-inflammatory assay, 70% of the investigated plant extracts (0.25 mg ml(-1)) inhibited both COX-1 and COX-2 activity (>50% and 70% for water and organic solvent extracts, respectively). An ethyl acetate leaf extract of Trichilia dregeana showed selective inhibition of COX-2 (81%). In the acerylcholinesterase inhibitory test, 21% of the plant extracts were active at a concentration <= 1 mg ml(-1) using the micro-dilution assay. The lowest IC50 value was 0.04 mg ml(-1) obtained with an ethanol bark extract of Combretum kraussii. None of the investigated plants showed any potential mutagenic effects. (c) 2005 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