| Literature DB >> 27446946 |
Han Chien Lin1, Yu-Liang Kuo2, Wen-Ju Lee1, Hui-Yi Yap3, Shao-Hung Wang4.
Abstract
Dermatophytosis, which is caused mainly by genera of Trichophyton, Epidermophyton, and Microsporum, is a frequent dermatological problem in tropical and subtropical countries. Investigations were carried out in this study to evaluate the antidermatophytic activity of the stems, leaves, and seeds of Croton tiglium, one of the traditional medicine plants indigenous to Asia. Ethanolic extracts of the stems, leaves, and seeds of C. tiglium were prepared by cold soak or heat reflux methods. The antidermatophytic activities of the extracts were evaluated by disc diffusion and microdilution susceptibility assays against Trichophyton mentagrophytes, T. rubrum, and Epidermophyton floccosum. The active components in the extracts were analyzed and identified by GC-MS. All ethanolic extracts of C. tiglium showed some antifungal activities against the three dermatophytes. The ethanolic stem extract had the greatest inhibitory activities against T. mentagrophytes and E. floccosum with MICs at 0.16 mg/mL and had a lower activity against T. rubrum (MIC: 0.31 mg/mL). Oleic acid and hexadecanoic acid were found to be the major constituents in the stem extract that demonstrated strong antidermatophytic activities. The ethanolic extracts of stem or seed of C. tiglium exhibit strong antidermatophytic activities and, thus, could be considered for application on treating skin fungal infections after appropriate processing.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27446946 PMCID: PMC4947497 DOI: 10.1155/2016/3237586
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Antifungal activity of Croton tiglium ethanolic extracts against Trichophyton mentagrophytes by the disc diffusion method.
| Specimen | Stem | Leave | Seed | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heat reflux | Cold soak | Heat reflux | Cold soak | Heat reflux | Cold soak | ||
| Extract | 10 | 11.1 ± 0.4za | 8.7 ± 0.3xa | 8.0 ± 0.0wa | 8.0 ± 0.0wa | 9.5 ± 0.4ya | 9.1 ± 0.3xya |
| 50 | 14.0 ± 0.4yb | 11.7 ± 0.2xb | 9.6 ± 0.3wb | 8.7 ± 0.5wa | 13.0 ± 0.6yb | 11.7 ± 0.6xb | |
| 250 | 17.0 ± 0.2zc | 14.2 ± 0.6yc | 12.5 ± 0.2xc | 11.1 ± 0.2wb | 16.1 ± 0.8zc | 14.4 ± 0.7yc | |
| 500 | 18.1 ± 0.4yd | 15.2 ± 0.4xd | 13.4 ± 0.1wd | 12.4 ± 0.8wc | 17.3 ± 0.7yc | 15.4 ± 0.8xc | |
|
| |||||||
| AMB (10 | 21.3 ± 0.2e | ||||||
The fungal spores were plated on SDA plates with the extracts or amphotericin B (AMB) absorbed on 8 mm filter paper discs. Duncan's multiple range test (p < 0.05) was used to statistically evaluate the difference in the diameters (mm) of inhibition zones. The letters “a, b, c, d, and e” indicated significant differences between groups treated with different amounts of the extracts. The letters “w, x, y, and z” indicate statistical differences among the extraction groups.
Antifungal activity of Croton tiglium ethanolic extracts against Trichophyton rubrum by the disc diffusion method.
| Specimen | Stem | Leave | Seed | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heat reflux | Cold soak | Heat reflux | Cold soak | Heat reflux | Cold soak | ||
| Extract | 10 | 9.8 ± 0.5xa | 8.0 ± 0.0wa | 8.0 ± 0.0wa | 8.0 ± 0.0wa | 8.0 ± 0.0wa | 8.0 ± 0.0wa |
| 50 | 13.9 ± 0.1yb | 10.1 ± 0.4xb | 8.9 ± 0.2wb | 9.9 ± 0.2wxb | 10.0 ± 0.2xb | 10.0 ± 1.0xb | |
| 250 | 16.8 ± 0.1yc | 12.5 ± 0.3xc | 10.5 ± 0.2wc | 12.3 ± 0.1xc | 12.9 ± 0.4xc | 12.7 ± 0.9xc | |
| 500 | 17.7 ± 0.5yd | 13.5 ± 0.21xd | 11.8 ± 0.1wd | 13.0 ± 0.2xd | 13.8 ± 0.6xd | 13.4 ± 0.5xc | |
|
| |||||||
| AMB (10 | 20.2 ± 0.2e | ||||||
The notes are the same as those in Table 1.
Antifungal activity of Croton tiglium ethanolic extracts against Epidermophyton floccosum by the disc diffusion method.
| Specimen | Stem | Leave | Seed | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heat reflux | Cold soak | Heat reflux | Cold soak | Heat reflux | Cold soak | ||
| Extract | 10 | 12.04 ± 0.65wa | 10.08 ± 0.41xa | 8.50 ± 0.35vwa | 8.00 ± 0.00va | 8.88 ± 0.27wa | 8.00 ± 0.00va |
| 50 | 15.08 ± 0.72xb | 13.88 ± 0.53wxb | 10.29 ± 1.10vb | 9.42 ± 0.24vb | 12.79 ± 0.60wb | 10.79 ± 0.06vb | |
| 250 | 17.50 ± 0.20zc | 16.08 ± 0.33yc | 12.42 ± 0.36vc | 13.50 ± 0.35wc | 15.17 ± 0.24xc | 13.92 ± 0.31wc | |
| 500 | 18.29 ± 0.29xc | 17.08 ± 0.46wc | 15.04 ± 0.91vd | 14.25 ± 0.54vc | 16.38 ± 0.18wd | 14.92 ± 0.51vd | |
|
| |||||||
| AMB (10 | 21.4 ± 0.1e | ||||||
The notes are the same as those in Table 1.
Minimal inhibitory concentrations (mg/mL) of Croton tiglium ethanolic extracts against dermatophytes.
| Specimen |
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stem | Heat reflux | 0.16 | 0.31 | 0.16 |
| Cold soak | 0.63 | 1.25 | 0.31 | |
|
| ||||
| Leave | Heat reflux | 1.25 | 2.50 | 0.63 |
| Cold soak | 2.50 | 1.25 | 1.25 | |
|
| ||||
| Seed | Heat reflux | 0.31 | 1.25 | 0.63 |
| Cold soak | 0.63 | 1.25 | 1.25 | |
Minimal inhibitory concentrations (mg/mL) against dermatophytes of the ethyl acetate fraction of the Croton tiglium ethanolic extracts.
| Specimen |
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stem | Heat reflux | 0.08 | 0.16 | 0.04 |
| Cold soak | 0.31 | 0.63 | 0.16 | |
|
| ||||
| Leave | Heat reflux | 0.63 | 1.25 | 0.31 |
| Cold soak | 1.25 | 0.63 | 0.63 | |
|
| ||||
| Seed | Heat reflux | 0.16 | 0.31 | 0.16 |
| Cold soak | 0.31 | 0.63 | 0.31 | |
All ethyl acetate insoluble (water soluble) fractions gave MIC values greater than 5 mg/mL.
GC-MS identification of ethyl acetate soluble components of the heat reflux ethanolic extracts from Croton tiglium.
| Compound identification | Stem | Seed | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Esters | Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate | 5.23 | — |
| Decanoic acid, ethyl ester | — | 6.44 | |
| Dodecanoic acid, ethyl ester | — | 5.74 | |
| Hexadecanoic acid, ethyl ester | 14.11 | 17.78 | |
| Tetradecanoic acid, ethyl ester | — | 4.39 | |
| 15-Methyl-11-hexadecenoic acid, methyl ester | 1.87 | — | |
| Heptadecanoic acid, ethyl ester | — | 0.95 | |
| Linoleic acid, ethyl ester | — | 35.90 | |
| Octadecanoic acid, ethyl ester | 5.56 | 24.47 | |
| Oleic acid, ethyl ester | 20.87 | — | |
|
| |||
| Alcohols | Stigmasterol | — | 4.33 |
|
| |||
| Acids | Hexadecanoic acid | 20.77 | — |
| Oleic acid | 14.04 | — | |
|
| |||
| Alkanes | Dodecamethylcyclohexasiloxane | 2.68 | — |
| Eicosane | 7.90 | — | |
| Tetradecamethyl-cycloheptasiloxane | 1.49 | — | |
Numbers indicate the percentages of each GC-MS peak. Those peaks with percentages less than 1% were omitted.
Minimal inhibitory concentrations (mg/mL) against dermatophytes of the major components of the Croton tiglium stem heat reflux extracts.
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oleic acid | 0.08 | 0.31 | 0.08 |
| Hexadecanoic acid | 0.31 | 0.31 | 0.16 |
| Oleate, ethyl ester | 2.5 | >5 | 0.63 |
| Hexadecanoic acid, ethyl ester | >5 | >5 | >5 |