ArticleAMB Express2025
Influence of solvents on the extraction efficiency and biological activity of marbled eel mucus.
Article in AMB Express, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Marbled eels are migratory between freshwater, brackish, and saltwater environments. Eel mucus contains biological components that are essential in protecting against environmental pathogens. The biological activity of mucus depends on endogenous and exogenous factors. This study aimed to determine the influence of solvents in extracting bioactive compounds from marbled eel mucus for aquaculture and human healthcare applications. The results show that different solvents affect the composition and biological activity of the extract from marbled eel mucus. The extracts have 19-23 other peaks of compounds, with retention times ranging from 0.8 to 60.0 min on high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). The selective extraction rate of components (% area) has significant differences between extracts with different solvents. The eel mucus extracted with acetone solvent exhibited the highest biological activity in all tests: IC50 = 36.603 mg/mL and SC% = 98.424% at 100 mg/mL for antioxidant activity; Antibacterial activity was demonstrated against S. aureus (IC50 = 65.00 ± 3.01 µg/mL) and B. subtilis (IC50 = 112.00 ± 7.89 µg/mL); The ability to inhibit human skin cancer cells (IC50 = 465.96 ± 8.54 µg/mL) and normal cells (IC50 = 453.36 ± 17.88 µg/mL). Extracts extracted with n-Hexane solvent showed higher safety for cells than extracts from other solvents (IC50 = 632.43 ± 18.80 µg/mL, higher than the value IC50 = 545.25 ± 26.36 µg/mL for skin cancer cells). These results provide important data for selecting and applying products derived from extracts of marbled eel mucus in the future, sparking excitement and optimism about this research's potential impact on aquaculture and human health care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.