ArticlePloS one2026
In vitro antimicrobial potential and phytochemical analysis of root extracts of Rumex abyssinicus from southern Ethiopia.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The escalating challenge of antimicrobial resistance require a continuous search for novel compounds with therapeutic potential. The approach of linking traditional practices and knowledge with evidence-based preclinical studies can help minimize the resource-intensive process of drug screening. Rumex abyssinicus is an important plant species used in Ethiopian traditional medicine, and this study aims to conduct a phytochemical analysis of root extracts of R. abyssinicus and determine its antimicrobial activity. R. abyssinicus roots were extracted in six solvents of different polarities. Agar well-diffusion assays of the extracts were performed against type culture bacterial strains, clinically bacterial isolates, and fungi, while the tube dilution method was used to determine the minimum inhibitory concentration of the extracts. The ground root powder was refluxed with acetonitrile (1:10 w/v) and analyzed using reverse-phase high-performance liquid chromatography combined with mass-spectrometry. A one-way analysis of variance followed by post hoc multiple comparisons was performed, and differences were considered statistically significant at p < 0.05. The root extract of R. abyssinicus showed antimicrobial activity against type culture bacteria and clinical isolates, and fungi. Extraction with different solvents yielded extracts with varying antimicrobial activities. The extracts showed a varied range of antimicrobial activities against the test organisms, with inhibition zones of 11-25 mm for bacteria and 9-24 mm for fungi. The MIC range fell between 12.5 and 100 mg/mL. The phytochemical analysis revealed the presence of major compounds such as emodin (30%), chrysophanol (18%), physcion (16%), helminthosporin (12%), citreorosein (11%) and emodic acid (8%) which are envisaged to have functional roles in chemical defense against the tested organisms. The susceptibilities of the tested bacteria and fungi varied depending on the type of solvent used for extraction and extract concentration. Enhanced antimicrobial activities were observed against the entire panel of bacteria compared to those against the test fungi. The results support the traditional use of R. abyssinicus for treating infectious diseases.
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.