ArticleScientific reports2025
Antibacterial and chemical profiling of Ulva intestinalis collected from Egypt.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The increasing limitations of antibiotic therapy, due to adverse effects and the alarming rise of bacterial resistance, underscore the urgent need for novel antimicrobial alternatives. This study investigated the antibacterial and antibiofilm activities of crude extracts from the green seaweed Ulva intestinalis as potential natural substitutes for conventional antibiotics. Samples were collected from the Mediterranean coast of Alexandria, Egypt, and extracted using ethanol, methanol, and acetone. The antibacterial activity against Staphylococcus aureus was assessed via the agar well diffusion method. Among the tested extracts, the ethanol extract at 200 µg/mL showed the largest inhibition zone (35.03 ± 0.04 mm), whereas the acetone extract exhibited the lowest activity (15.7 ± 0.09 mm) at the same concentration. The antibiofilm efficacy, evaluated using a 96-well microtiter plate assay, revealed that the methanolic extract inhibited biofilm formation by 91.26% at 200 µg/mL, the highest tested concentration. GC-MS analysis identified several bioactive constituents, including pentadecane, eicosane, and 2,6,10,14-tetramethylpentadecane, whereas FTIR spectra confirmed the presence of phenolic, alcoholic, aliphatic, ketonic, aromatic, and amine functional groups. Molecular docking studies demonstrated strong binding affinities of selected compounds toward key S. aureus targets (RNA polymerase, DNA gyrase, and PBP2a), suggesting potential mechanisms involving disruption of transcription, DNA replication, and β-lactam resistance. Overall, these results highlight U. intestinalis as a promising marine-derived source of antimicrobial and antibiofilm agents with potential pharmaceutical applications.
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.