Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20467752›Full record

ArticleParasitology research2010

Evaluation of botanical extracts against Haemaphysalis bispinosa Neumann and Hippobosca maculata Leach.

Abdul Abduz Zahir, Abdul Abdul Rahuman, Asokan Bagavan, Thirunavukkarasu Santhoshkumar, Razack Rafi Mohamed, Chinnaperumal Kamaraj, Govindasamy Rajakumar, Gandhi Elango, Chidambaram Jayaseelan, Sampath Marimuthu

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Parasitology research, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
9.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Novel Pesticidal Efficacy ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Medicinal Plants ofJournal of tropical medicine · 2022
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Diversity of Parasitic Diarrhea Associated withAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2019
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Health Effects of Psidium guajava L. Leaves: An Overview of the Last Decade.International journal of molecular sciences · 2017
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Abdul Abduz ZahirUnit of Nanotechnology and Bioactive Natural Products, Post Graduate and Research Department of Zoology, C.Abdul Hakeem College, Melvisharam, Vellore District, Tamil Nadu, India.
Abdul Abdul Rahuman
Asokan Bagavan
Thirunavukkarasu Santhoshkumar
Razack Rafi Mohamed
Chinnaperumal Kamaraj
Govindasamy Rajakumar
Gandhi Elango
Chidambaram Jayaseelan
Sampath Marimuthu
Vellore Institute of Technology University · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the current study, in vitro evaluation of crude hexane, chloroform, ethyl acetate, acetone, and methanol extracts of Anisomeles malabarica (L.) R. Br., Gloriosa superba L., Psidium guajava L., Ricinus communis L., and Solanum trilobatum L. exhibited acaricidal and insecticidal activities against the adult of Haemaphysalis bispinosa Neumann (Acarina: Ixodidae) and hematophagous fly Hippobosca maculata Leach (Diptera: Hippoboscidae). All plant extracts showed moderate toxic effect on parasites after 24 h of exposure; the complete inhibition (100%) at the maximum concentration tested (3,000 ppm) was obtained in acetone, methanol, hexane, and chloroform extracts of A. malabarica; methanol, chloroform, and ethyl acetate extracts of G. superba; acetone extract of P. guajava; methanol extract of R. communis; and leaf hexane extract of S. trilobatum; and the lowest inhibition (38%) was recorded for the seed hexane extract of S. trilobatum. The highest parasite dead was found in leaf acetone and methanol extracts of A. malabarica, seed methanol of G. superba, leaf methanol of R. communis against H. bispinosa (LC(50) = 466.15, 719.78, 476.06, and 243.87 ppm; LC(90) = 1,837.96, 2,014.47, 1,904.36, and 2,692.15 ppm), leaf hexane and chloroform extracts of A. malabarica, seed chloroform and ethyl acetate of G. superba, leaf acetone of P. guajava, leaf methanol of R. communis, and leaf hexane extract of S. trilobatum against H. maculata (LC(50) = 495.61, 414.81, 360.02, 479.37, 646.30, 506.13, and 432.77 ppm; LC(90) = 1,914.84, 1,956.59, 1,598.54, 1,636.41, 2,192.73, 1,982.66, and 1,872.33 ppm), respectively. These results suggest that the leaf methanol of R. communis, chloroform extracts of A. malabarica, and chloroform extract of G. superba have the potential to be used as an ideal eco-friendly approach for the control of the H. bispinosa and H. maculata. Therefore, this study provides first report on the parasitic activities of plant extracts from Southern India.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntiparasitic AgentsDipteraIndiaIxodidaeMagnoliopsidaParasitic Sensitivity TestsPlant ExtractsPlant LeavesSeedsAntiparasitic AgentsPlant Extracts

Identifiers

PMID20467752
OpenAlexW2050458601

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.