ArticlePloS one2026
Pharmacological evaluation of mangrove plant Rhizophora mucronata (Lam.) grown in the coastal area of Sundarbans.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rhizophora mucronata, a mangrove species native to coastal region of Bangladesh, has been drawn significant interests due to its potential ecological and therapeutic values, particularly as antioxidants, antibacterial and anti-inflammatory properties. The current investigation was aimed to identify the bioactive compounds from the different fractions of Rhizophora mucronata and to determine their antioxidants, analgesic, antidiabetic, antimicrobial along with in-vitro and in-vivo anticancer properties. Total three known compounds namely N-trans-para-caffeoyl-tyramine (1), β-sitosterol (2) and rutin (3) were isolated from the ethyl acetate fractions (ERM) and their structures were elucidated by analyzing 1H-NMR spectral data. Dichloromethane (DRM) and ethyl acetate (ERM) fractions showed significant free radical scavenging properties (IC50 value 12.18 and 11.7 μg/mL, respectively) compared to the standard ascorbic acid (6.36 μg/mL) in DPPH free radical scavenging assay. All three fractions exhibited notable analgesic effect in mice compared to standard drug diclofenac sodium in acetic acid induced writhing method. DRM and ERM fractions revealed significant glucose lowering effects compared to standard glibenclamide in streptozotocin induce diabetic mice model. Besides, all the fractions showed remarkable antibacterial effects (zone of inhibition 11.1-17.3 mm) against all selected Gram-positive but showed moderate activity against the Gram-negative bacteria. In-vitro cytotoxicity test of DRM and ERM fractions exhibited cytotoxic effect (IC50 value 88.94 µg/ml and 127.6 µg/ml, respectively) against HeLa cell. The in-vivo cell growth inhibition of the three fractions on EAC (Ehrlich ascites carcinoma) cell demonstrated that ERM fraction furnished maximum cell growth inhibition (54.61%) compared to 84.83% inhibition by bleomycin. From the above findings, it is evident that ethyl acetate fractions of R. mucronata, can be exploited for future drug development and traditional medicinal 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.