ArticleBMC complementary medicine and therapies2025
Chemical profiling and mechanistic insights into the antibacterial efficacy of Melaleuca cajuputi leaf extract.
Article in BMC complementary medicine and therapies, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe emergence of antimicrobial resistance and the prevalence of bacterial infections have prompted the search for novel antimicrobials with diverse therapeutic potential from natural products. Thus, this study investigated the antibacterial efficacy of the leaf extracts of M. cajuputi. Additionally, the chemical composition and the mechanism of action of the most active extract (MAE) were evaluated.
methodsThe antibacterial activity of leaf extracts of M. cajuputi was assessed using the broth microdilution assay. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was used to investigate the effects of MAE on the morphology of bacterial cells. Meanwhile, the chemical composition of the MAE was analyzed using Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). AutoDock Vina was used for molecular docking analysis to unveil the interactions between the ligands and the active sites of the target bacterial proteins.
resultsThe crude extracts were obtained through cold maceration. The methanolic extract demonstrated the most significant antibacterial activity, with minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) values spanning 0.25 mg/mL to 2 mg/mL. After 12 h of treatment with 1 × MIC of the methanolic extract, the bacteria showed discernible morphological alterations, including disrupted cell wall and membrane integrity. Thirty compounds were identified in the MAE and subsequently subjected to molecular docking studies against target bacterial proteins. Amongst the compounds, methylanthracene, cycloisolongifolene, diphenyl imidazole, benzil monohydrazone, and trimethoxybenzoic acid showed pronounced binding affinities towards Klebsiella pneumoniae membrane protein (PDB ID: 5O79), peptide binding protein (PDB ID: 7RJJ), Streptococcus agalactiae cell wall surface anchor (PDB ID: 2XTL), pilin (PDB ID: 3PHS), Staphylococcus aureus transglycosylase (PDB ID: 3VMQ), and penicillin-binding proteins (PDB ID: 3VSK). The binding energy scores for these interactions varied between - 6.0 kcal/mol and - 7.5 kcal/mol. Molecular dynamics simulations validated the stability of these interactions, reinforcing the in vitro findings of cell wall and membrane disruption.
conclusionThe findings of this study indicated that the methanolic extract of M. cajuputi leaves displayed potent antibacterial activity against Klebsiella pneumoniae, S. agalactiae, and S. aureus. The molecular docking analysis reveals significant binding interactions between the identified compounds and the target bacterial proteins, highlighting the potential of M. cajuputi as a novel source of anti-infectives targeting bacterial infections.
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.