| Literature DB >> 25147493 |
Sajjad Hussain Sumrra1, Muhammad Ibrahim2, Sabahat Ambreen3, Muhammad Imran4, Muhammad Danish1, Fouzia Sultana Rehmani3.
Abstract
New series of three bidentate N, O donor typeEntities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25147493 PMCID: PMC4134787 DOI: 10.1155/2014/812924
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bioinorg Chem Appl Impact factor: 7.778
Scheme 2
Figure 1Comparison of antibacterial activity of Schiff bases versus metal(II) complexes.
Figure 2Comparison of antifungal activity of Schiff bases versus metal(II) complexes.
Antibacterial bioassay of ligands and their metal(II) complexes (zone of inhibition in mm).
| Compounds | (a) | (b) | (c) | (d) | (e) | (f) | SA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ( | 14 | 18 | 16 | 17 | 13 | 17 | 1.94 |
| ( | 13 | 15 | 18 | 10 | 17 | 15 | 2.88 |
| ( | 16 | 19 | 14 | 15 | 09 | 14 | 3.27 |
| (1) | 20 | 14 | 19 | 23 | 16 | 19 | 3.15 |
| (2) | 15 | 18 | 21 | 14 | 18 | 16 | 2.53 |
| (3) | 18 | 24 | 18 | 19 | 12 | 16 | 3.92 |
| (4) | 24 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 21 | 18 | 2.07 |
| (5) | 26 | 23 | 24 | 23 | 20 | 21 | 2.14 |
| (6) | 21 | 14 | 17 | 18 | 22 | 16 | 3.03 |
| (7) | 18 | 15 | 20 | 15 | 19 | 20 | 2.32 |
| (8) | 17 | 21 | 18 | 19 | 17 | 22 | 2.10 |
| (9) | 22 | 20 | 19 | 25 | 21 | 22 | 2.07 |
| (10) | 26 | 22 | 24 | 26 | 23 | 22 | 1.83 |
| (11) | 22 | 17 | 18 | 12 | 16 | 23 | 4.05 |
| (12) | 16 | 17 | 15 | 21 | 19 | 17 | 2.07 |
|
| 30 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 29 | 28 | 1.05 |
(a) E. coli; (b) S. faecalis; (c) P. aeruginosa; (d) K. pneumoniae; (e) S. aureus; (f) B. subtilis; SD: standard drug; weaker = 0–10 mm, moderate = 11–15 mm, above 15 mm = significant, and SA = statistical analysis.
Antifungal bioassay of ligands and their metal(II) complexes (% inhibition).
| Compounds | (a) | (b) | (c) | (d) | (e) | (f) | SA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ( | 43 | 57 | 00 | 45 | 48 | 49 | 20.33 |
| ( | 58 | 50 | 41 | 00 | 55 | 39 | 21.21 |
| ( | 49 | 46 | 55 | 42 | 38 | 60 | 8.16 |
| (1) | 55 | 65 | 18 | 58 | 56 | 59 | 16.94 |
| (2) | 65 | 57 | 55 | 11 | 71 | 41 | 21.64 |
| (3) | 44 | 60 | 68 | 43 | 49 | 15 | 18.22 |
| (4) | 73 | 62 | 39 | 58 | 67 | 55 | 11.71 |
| (5) | 60 | 71 | 78 | 66 | 57 | 74 | 8.16 |
| (6) | 61 | 00 | 63 | 55 | 67 | 42 | 25.07 |
| (7) | 63 | 72 | 59 | 28 | 56 | 68 | 15.65 |
| (8) | 58 | 70 | 35 | 56 | 42 | 63 | 13.13 |
| (9) | 69 | 38 | 56 | 60 | 55 | 00 | 24.84 |
| (10) | 63 | 72 | 78 | 75 | 61 | 70 | 6.68 |
| (11) | 56 | 67 | 38 | 40 | 55 | 36 | 12.48 |
| (12) | 43 | 55 | 34 | 70 | 49 | 62 | 13.01 |
(a) T. mentogrophytes; (b) E. floccosum; (c) A. niger; (d) M. canis; (e) F.culmorum; (f) T. schoenleinii; weaker = 0–30%, moderate = 31–54%, 55–100% = significant, and SA = statistical analysis.
Scheme 1Minimum inhibitory concentration (μg/mL) of the selected compounds (3)–(5) and (9)–(12) against selected bacteria.
| Number |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (3) | — | 52.64 | — | — | — | — |
| (4) | 45.68 | — | — | — | — | — |
| (5) | 52.17 | 33.16 | 35.34 | — | — | — |
| (9) | — | — | — | 51.22 | — | — |
| (10) | 38.34 | 47.21 | 44.41 | 33.67 | — | — |
| (11) | — | — | — | — | — | 49.26 |
| (12) | 53.41 | 35.67 | 43.94 | 32.11 | 40.33 | 47.82 |