| Literature DB >> 16571139 |
Deborah K B Runyoro1, Mecky I N Matee, Olipa D Ngassapa, Cosam C Joseph, Zakaria H Mbwambo.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Candida albicans has become resistant to the already limited, toxic and expensive anti-Candida agents available in the market. These factors necessitate the search for new anti-fungal agents.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2006 PMID: 16571139 PMCID: PMC1481531 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6882-6-11
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Complement Altern Med ISSN: 1472-6882 Impact factor: 3.659
Figure 1Map of Tanzania showing the regions where plants were collected.
TLC Bioautography results of various extracts.
| 1 | Fabaceae | T | L | 18.3 | 3 | - | - | |
| 2 | Fabaceae | T | Rb | 16.5 | 3 | 63 | < 4 | |
| 75 | < 4 | |||||||
| 85 | < 4 | |||||||
| 3 | Fabaceae | T | Rb | 12.5 | 2 | - | - | |
| 4 | Rubiaceae | T | Ap | 6.5 | 3 | - | - | |
| 5 | Rubiaceae | T | R | 16.0 | 4 | 80 | < 4 | |
| 100 | 10 | |||||||
| 6 | Fabaceae | T | Rb | 9.0 | 5 | 25 | 15 | |
| 40 | 4 | |||||||
| 50 | 5 | |||||||
| 60 | 6 | |||||||
| 7 | Sapindaceae | T | Ap | 3.0 | 3 | - | - | |
| 8 | Liliaceae | Lit* | Ap | 16.4 | 2 | 0 | < 4 | |
| 50 | < 4 | |||||||
| 75 | < 4 | |||||||
| 9 | Zygophyllaceae | T | Rb | 22.0 | 5 | 30 | 13 | |
| 10 | Convolvulaceae | Lit* | R | 6.0 | 3 | - | - | |
| 11 | Capparaceae | Lit* | L | 14.5 | 4 | - | - | |
| 12 | Euphorbiaceae | Lit* | Sb | 10.0 | 2 | - | - | |
| 13 | Fabaceae | T | L | 8.0 | 3 | 37 | 4 | |
| 53 | 10 | |||||||
| 78 | 10 | |||||||
| 14 | Caricaceae | T | R | 6.0 | 3 | - | - | |
| 15 | Fabaceae | T | Rb | 11.5 | 1 | - | - | |
| 16 | Fabaceae | Lit* | Sb | 10.0 | 4 | 60 | 10 | |
| 85 | 8 | |||||||
| 17 | Rubiaceae | T | Rb | 6.0 | 3 | 0 | < 4 | |
| 40 | < 4 | |||||||
| 55 | < 4 | |||||||
| 80 | < 4 | |||||||
| 18 | Bombacaceae | Lit* | L | 5.5 | 3 | - | - | |
| 19 | Rubiaceae | T | Rb | 6.0 | 3 | 0 | 5 | |
| 6 | ||||||||
| 20 | Euphorbiaceae | T | L | 9.5 | 1 | - | - | |
| 21 | Combretaceae | T | R | 13.5 | 4 | 33 | 7 | |
| 48 | 4 | |||||||
| 22 | Combretaceae | Lit* | L | 3.5 | 3 | 46 | 9 | |
| 61 | 6.5 | |||||||
| 23 | Acanthaceae | T | W | 8.0 | 3 | - | - | |
| 24 | Sapindaceae | Lit* | R | 5.0 | 3 | - | - | |
| 25 | Fabaceae | T | L | 12.0 | 1 | - | - | |
| 26 | Apocynaceae | Li | L | 13.0 | 2 | 10 | 5 | |
| 40 | 5 | |||||||
| 85 | <4 | |||||||
| 27 | Boraginaceae | T | Sb | 6.5 | 3 | - | - | |
| 28 | Celastraceae | T | Rb | 13.5 | 3 | - | - | |
| 29 | Fabaceae | Li | Sb | 4.5 | 3 | - | - | |
| 30 | Euphorbiaceae | Lit** | S | 2.5 | 3 | - | - | |
| 31 | Simaroubaceae | Lit*&T | Rb | 12.5 | 1 | 90 | 10 | |
| 32 | Simaroubaceae | Lit* | Ap | 10.5 | 1 | - | - | |
| 33 | Malvaceae | Lit* | Ap | 3.5 | 3 | - | - | |
| 34 | Apocynaceae | Lit* | L | 13.0 | 5 | 45 | 10 | |
| 35 | Anacardiaceae | T | R | 9.5 | 3 | - | - | |
| 36 | Euphorbiaceae | T | R | 15.0 | 3 | 50 | 5 | |
| 60 | 4 | |||||||
| 37 | Lamiaceae | T | R | 5.5 | 3 | - | - | |
| 38 | Anacardiaceae | T | Rb | 11.5 | 1 | - | - | |
| 39 | Anacardiaceae | T | Rb | 9.0 | 3 | - | - | |
| 40 | Euphorbiaceae | Lit* | Ap | 11.5 | 1 | - | - | |
| 41 | Solanaceae | T | L | 13.6 | 1 | 0 | 7 | |
| 45 | 6 | |||||||
| 80 | < 4 | |||||||
| 42 | Lamiaceae | T | R | 5.5 | 3 | 72 | 12.5 | |
| 43 | Lamiaceae | T | L | 2.0 | 1 | 85 | 7 | |
| 44 | Euphorbiaceae | Lit* | S | 12.0 | 4 | - | - | |
| 45 | Euphorbiaceae | Lit* | R | 12.0 | 1 | - | - | |
| 46 | Pseudovigna argentea (Willd) Verde | Fabaceae | T | L | 4.0 | 3 | Sf | <4 |
| 47 | Salvadoraceae | T | Rb | 8.5 | 3 | 80 | 10 | |
| 48 | Anacardiaceae | T | Rb | 9.0 | 3 | - | - | |
| 49 | Polygalaceae | T | Rb | 26.5 | 3 | 72 | < 4 | |
| 85 | < 4 | |||||||
| 50 | Malvaceae | Lit* | Ap | 4.0 | 1 | 85 | 10 | |
| 51 | Euphorbiaceae | T | L | 8.0 | 1 | 0 | 10 | |
| 80 | 5 | |||||||
| 100 | < 4 | |||||||
| 52 | Thymelaeaceae | T | R | 5.7 | 3 | - | - | |
| 53 | Dilleniaceae | T | L | 4.0 | 3 | - | - | |
| 54 | Annonaceae | T | R | 7.0 | 3 | 70 | 7 | |
| 55 | Verbenaceae | Lit* | Rb | 6.0 | 3 | 52 | < 4 | |
| 65 | < 4 | |||||||
| 56 | Fabaceae | Lit* | Sb | 6.5 | 3 | - | - | |
| 57 | Olacaceae | T | Rb | 18.5 | 4 | - | - | |
| 58 | Olacaceae | T | Rb | 8.5 | 4 | - | - | |
| 59 | Sapindaceae | T | R | 6.5 | 3 | 11 | 4 | |
| 41 | 5 | |||||||
| 60 | Zanthoxylum chalybeum Engl. | Rutaceae | Lit* | Rb | 9.0 | 4 | 30 | < 4 |
| 85 | < 4 | |||||||
| 61 | Rhamnaceae | Lit* | L | 11.5 | 6 | 37 | 9 | |
| 62 | Rhamnaceae | Lit* | Sb | 9.0 | 3 | - | - | |
| 63 | Rhamnaceae | T | R | 8.0 | 3 | 75 | < 4 |
Key:
Ap: aerial parts; L: leaves; Lit: literature; R: roots; Rb: root bark; S: stem; Sb: stem bark; Sf: several faint spots, T: traditional healer; W: whole plant, -: no inhibition, *Sawhney et al. (20), **Khan et al. (21),
Mobile phases
1: Chloroform: Methanol 9:1
2: Chloroform:Methanol 5:1
3: Chloroform:Methanol 4:1
4: Chloroform:Methanol:Ethylacetate 4:1:1
5: Chloroform:Methanol:Ethylacetate:water 28:30:35:5
6: Dichloromethane:Methanol:Water 30:10:1
Figure 2Chromatograms (i) and bioautograms (ii) for Holarrhena febrifuga leaves (a), Balanites aegyptiaca root bark (b) and Albizia anthelmintica root bark (c). Mobile phase: Chloroform:Methanol:Ethylacetate:water 28:30:35:5; Amphotericin B (A)
Figure 3Chromatograms (i) and bioautograms (ii) for Combretum zeyheri leaves (d), Plectranthus barbatus roots (e) and Vitex fischeri root bark (f) mobile phase: Chloroform: Methanol 4:1 3; Amphotericin B (A).
Figure 4Chromatograms (i) and bioautograms (ii) for Margaritaria discoidea roots (g), Cajanus cajan leaves (h) and Zanha africana roots (j) mobile phase: Chloroform: Methanol 4:1 3; Amphotericin B (A).