Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28241818›Full record

ArticleBMC complementary and alternative medicine2017

The antibacterial activity of extracts of nine plant species with good activity against Escherichia coli against five other bacteria and cytotoxicity of extracts.

Ishaku Leo Elisha, Francien S Botha, Lyndy Joy McGaw, Jacobus Nicolaas Eloff

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC complementary and alternative medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 82 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
82citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
24.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

82 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 321 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Isolation, characterization, and analysis of pure compounds fromBiochemistry and biophysics reports · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

22 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Ishaku Leo ElishaPhytomedicine Programme, Department of Paraclinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X04, Onderstepoort, 0110, Pretoria, South Africa.
Francien S BothaPhytomedicine Programme, Department of Paraclinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X04, Onderstepoort, 0110, Pretoria, South Africa.
Lyndy Joy McGawPhytomedicine Programme, Department of Paraclinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X04, Onderstepoort, 0110, Pretoria, South Africa.
Jacobus Nicolaas EloffPhytomedicine Programme, Department of Paraclinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X04, Onderstepoort, 0110, Pretoria, South Africa. kobus.eloff@up.ac.za.
Onderstepoort Veterinary Academic Hospital · ZANational Veterinary Research Institute · NGUniversity of Pretoria · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe development of antibiotic resistant bacteria stems from a number of factors, including inappropriate use of antibiotics in human and animal health and their prolonged use as growth promoters at sub-clinical doses in poultry and livestock production. We were interested in investigating plants that could be useful in protecting humans or animals against diarrhoea. We decided to work on extracts of nine plant species with good activity against Escherichia coli based on earlier work in the Phytomedicine Programme. Leaves of nine medicinal plant species with high antibacterial activity against Escherichia coli were extracted with acetone and their minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) values determined using a microplate serial dilution technique against Gram-positive (Staphylococcus aureus, Enterococcus faecalis and Bacillus cereus) and Gram-negative (Escherichia coli, Salmonella Typhimurium and Pseudomonas aeruginosa) bacteria. Bioautography was used to determine the number of bioactive compounds in each extract. In vitro safety of the extracts was determined using the 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazolyl-2)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide reduction assay on Vero cells.

resultsThe extracts were active against all the pathogens with average MICs ranging from 0.02 to 0.52 mg/ml. As expected E. coli was relatively sensitive, while E. faecalis and S. Typhimurium were more resistant to the extracts (average MICs of 0.28 mg/ml and 0.22 mg/ml respectively). Cremaspora triflora and Maesa lanceolata leaf extracts had higher activity than the other extracts against Gram-positive and Gram-negative pathogens with mean MICs of 0.07 mg/ml and 0.09 mg/ml respectively. Extracts of Maesa lanceolata and Hypericum roeperianum had the highest total antibacterial activity (TAA) at 1417 and 963 ml/g respectively. All extracts with the exception of that of Maesa lanceolata, Elaeodendron croceum and Calpurnia aurea had relatively low cytotoxicity with LC

conclusionsThere was a weak positive, but statistically non-significant correlation between the potency of the extracts and their cytotoxicity (R = 0.45, ρ > 0.05). The activity of the extracts on the test bacteria was in some cases not correlated with cytotoxicity, as shown by selectivity indices >1. This means that cellular toxicity was probably not due to compounds with antibacterial activity. Some of the extracts had a good potential for therapeutic use against the bacterial pathogens or for application in treating diarhoea. It does not appear that activity against E. coli is a good predictor of activity against Gram-negative rather than Gram-positive bacteria. Further investigation is in progress on C. triflora and H. roeperianum, both of which had promising activities and potential safety based on cytotoxicity.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacillus cereusCelastraceaeChlorocebus aethiopsDiarrheaEnterococcus faecalisEscherichia coliHypericumPlant ExtractsPrimulaceaePseudomonasRubiaceaeSalmonella typhimuriumStaphylococcus aureusVero CellsAnti-Bacterial AgentsPlant ExtractsAntibacterial activityCellular safetyCorrelationEfficacyNosocomial bacteriaPotency

Identifiers

PMID28241818
PMCPMC5329917
OpenAlexW2593406965

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.