Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33031410›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Antibacterial activity of plant species used for oral health against Porphyromonas gingivalis.

Danielle H Carrol, François Chassagne, Micah Dettweiler, Cassandra L Quave

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2026
    Article
  4. Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Dental research journal · 2025
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Microorganisms · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Antimicrobial Efficiency ofMicroorganisms · 2023
    Review
  18. Review
  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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Danielle H CarrolCenter for the Study of Human Health, Emory University College of Arts and Sciences, Atlanta, GA, United States of America.
François ChassagneCenter for the Study of Human Health, Emory University College of Arts and Sciences, Atlanta, GA, United States of America.
Micah DettweilerDepartment of Dermatology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, United States of America.
Cassandra L QuaveCenter for the Study of Human Health, Emory University College of Arts and Sciences, Atlanta, GA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-9615-7886
Emory University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Porphyromonas gingivalis is the keystone pathogen of periodontitis, a chronic inflammatory disease which causes tooth loss and deterioration of gingiva. Medicinal plants have been traditionally used for oral hygiene and health and might play a role as antibacterial agents against oral pathogens. In this work, we aimed to evaluate the antibacterial activity of plants used for oral hygiene or symptoms of periodontitis against P. gingivalis. We first reviewed the literature to identify plant species used for oral hygiene or symptoms of periodontitis. Then, we cross-checked this species list with our in-house library of plant extracts to select extracts for testing. Antibacterial activity tests were then performed for each plant extract against P. gingivalis, and their cytotoxicity was assessed on HaCaT cells. The selectivity index (SI) was then calculated. A total of 416 plant species belonging to 110 families and 305 genera were documented through our literature search, and 158 plant species were noted as being used by North American Native peoples Once cross-checked with the extracts contained in our library of natural products, 30 matches were identified and 21 were defined as high priority. Of the 109 extracts from 21 plant species selected and tested, 21 extracts from 11 plants had higher than 90% inhibition on P. gingivalis at 64 μg/mL and were further selected for MIC (Minimum Inhibitory Concentration) assays. Out of 21 plant extracts, 13 extracts (7 plant species) had a SI > 10. Pistacia lentiscus fruits showed the best MIC with value of 8 μg/mL, followed by Zanthoxylum armatum fruits/seeds with a MIC of 16 μg/mL. P. lentiscus fruits also showed the highest SI of 256. Most of the extracts tested present promising antibacterial activity and low cytotoxicity. Further testing for biofilm eradication and examination of activity against other dental pathogens and oral commensals should be performed to confirm the potential of these extracts as antibacterial agents. Future work will focus on application of a bioassay-guided fractionation approach to isolating and identifying the most active natural products in the top performing extracts. This study can serve as a basis for their future development as ingredients for oral hygiene products.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsCell LineCell SurvivalFruitHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsOral HealthPistaciaPlant ExtractsPlants, MedicinalPorphyromonas gingivalisSeedsZanthoxylumAnti-Bacterial AgentsPlant Extracts

Identifiers

PMID33031410
PMCPMC7544490
OpenAlexW3091814886

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.