| Literature DB >> 31717808 |
Nasir Mahmood1,2, Ruqia Nazir3, Muslim Khan3, Rashid Iqbal3, Muhammad Adnan4, Mohib Ullah5, Hongyi Yang1,2.
Abstract
Plants are a rich source of secondary metabolites that have been found to have medicinal properties. The present study was conducted to evaluate the phytochemical screening, antibacterial activities and heavy metal analysis of seven medicinal plants i.e., Nigella sativa (seeds), Trigonella foenum-graecum (seeds), Brassica campestris (seeds), Pistacia integerrima (galls), Linum usitatissimum (seeds), Hyssopus officinalis (flowers), Ephedra vulgaris (dry branches) and its two recipes which are used by hakims (Practitioners of local herbal medicines), against different diseases particularly respiratory tract infections. The obtained results revealed that alkaloids (30%) and flavonoids (41%) were in maximum quantity in P. integerrima (galls) while saponins (10.9%) were in maximum quantity in Recipe 1. The antibacterial activity was determined by the agar well disc diffusion method using methanol, ethanol, chloroform and deionized water extracts. Each plant extract was tested against one Gram-positive (Streptococcus pneumonia) and two Gram-negative (Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Klebsiella pneumonia) bacteria. Maximum zones of inhibition in methanol, ethanol, chloroform and aqueous extract were seen in T. foenum-graecum against S. pneumonia (20.06 ± 0.16 mm), B. campestris against S. pneumonia (22.40 ± 0.24 mm), Recipe 2 against K. pneumonia (20.06 ± 0.16 mm) and N. sativa against S. pneumonia (20.23 ± 0.16 mm), respectively. The concentrations of heavy metals were determined by atomic absorption spectrophotometer and showed the existence of high concentration of Iron (Fe), Lead (Pb) and Chromium (Cr). Thus, it has been found that medicinal plants individually as well as their recipes are potentially active against various diseases particularly respiratory tract infections.Entities:
Keywords: antibacterial activities; medicinal plants; phytochemicals; recipes
Year: 2019 PMID: 31717808 PMCID: PMC6918150 DOI: 10.3390/plants8110454
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Quantitative phytochemical screening of alkaloids, flavonoids and saponins of Recipe 1, Recipe 2 and their individual plants.
| S.No | Recipes/Plants (Part Used) | Alkaloids (%) | Flavonoids (%) | Saponins (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Recipe 1 | 10.60 | 28.50 | 10.90 |
| 2 | 1.30 | 13.00 | 1.15 | |
| 3 | 3.22 | 10.00 | 0.35 | |
| 4 | 3.23 | 13.80 | 2.45 | |
| 5 | 30.00 | 41.20 | 3.60 | |
| 6 | Recipe 2 | 7.80 | 12.70 | 1.00 |
| 7 | 3.21 | 6.10 | 0.65 | |
| 8 | 5.00 | 8.10 | 1.05 | |
| 9 | 10.40 | 24.70 | 2.20 |
Figure 1Mean concentration of heavy metals in mg/kg in medicinal plants and in their recipes. Each column represents mean value of three independent replicates and the error bars indicate standard deviation.
Antibacterial activity of Recipe 1 and its individual plant extracts against three bacterial pathogens.
| Recipe/Plant (parts used) | Bacteria | Methanol Extract (mm) | Ethanol Extract (mm) | Chloroform Extract (mm) | Aqueous Extract (mm) | Cipr (mm) | DMSO (mm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recipe 1 |
| 14.23 ± 0.20 | 10.70 ± 0.16 | 14.43 ± 0.30 | 12.33 ± 0.28 | 28 | - |
|
| 14.70 ± 0.16 | 10.70 ± 0.16 | 12.26 ± 0.20 | 0 | 0 | - | |
|
| 14.66 ± 0.16 | 16.46 ± 0.12 | 12.46 ± 0.16 | 15.50 ± 0.16 | 32 | - | |
|
|
| 13.21 ± 0.16 | 19.40 ± 0.08 | 12.36 ± 0.28 | 20.23 ± 0.16 | 33 | - |
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - | |
|
| 12.03 ± 0.16 | 13.20 ± 0.12 | 14.26 ± 0.20 | 14.30 ± 0.16 | 30 | - | |
|
|
| 11.76 ± 0.12 | 22.40 ± 0.24 | 16.36 ± 0.28 | 16.26 ± 0.20 | 32 | - |
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - | |
|
| 12.70 ± 0.16 | 15.46 ± 0.16 | 13.16 ± 0.16 | 12.43 ± 0.20 | 29 | - | |
|
|
| 12.13 ± 0.12 | 12.50 ± 0.16 | 14.40 ± 0.29 | 14.03 ± 0.12 | 31 | - |
|
| 0 | 12.30 ± 0.16 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - | |
|
| 16.70 ± 0.16 | 16.63 ± 0.09 | 11.30 ± 0.24 | 11.53 ± 0.28 | 28 | - | |
|
|
| 16.36 ± 0.20 | 16.43 ± 0.24 | 18.43 ± 0.36 | 20.06 ± 0.16 | 33 | - |
|
| 8.30 ± 0.16 | 9.53 ± 0.16 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - | |
|
| 14.60 ± 0.24 | 18.56 ± 0.24 | 16.50 ± 0.32 | 19.36 ± 0.32 | 34 | - |
Note: ANOVA value (p < 0.01) for all samples.
Figure 2Comparative antibacterial activities of methanol, ethanol, chloroform and aqueous extracts of the N. sativa (seeds), B. campestris (seeds), T. foenum-graecum (seeds) and P. integerrima (galls) in Recipe 1. Each column represents the mean value of three independent replicates and the error bars indicate standard deviation.
Heavy Metals in Individual Plants and Its Recipe 1.
| Recipe/Plant (parts used) | Cd (mg/kg) | Fe (mg/kg) | Zn (mg/kg) | Cu (mg/kg) | Pb (mg/kg) | Cr (mg/kg) | Ni (mg/kg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recipe 1 | BDL | 47.22 ± 0.010 | 76.98 ± 0.019 | 16.62 ± 0.043 | 53.22 ± 0.178 | 199.92 ± 0.218 | BDL |
|
| BDL | 59.61 ± 0.023 | 68.52 ± 0.027 | 16.77 ± 0.009 | 53.79 ± 0.577 | 197.91 ± 0.216 | 0.69 ± 0.014 |
|
| BDL | 80.43 ± 0.060 | 53.94 ± 0.019 | 6.3 ± 0.019 | 65.1 ± 0.062 | 200.07 ± 0.152 | 0.63 ± 0.015 |
|
| BDL | 55.92 ± 0.023 | 45.24 ± 0.023 | 12.24 ± 0.017 | 52.8 ± 0.738 | 192.72 ± 0.316 | BDL |
|
| BDL | 42.03 ± 0.030 | 6.66 ± 0.009 | 5.1 ± 0.011 | 74.46 ± 0.165 | 191.97 ± 0.502 | BDL |
Note: Cd was observed below detection level.
Antibacterial activity of Recipe 2 and its individual plant extracts against three bacterial pathogens.
| Recipe/Plant (parts used) | Bacteria | Methanol Extract (mm) | Ethanol Extract (mm) | Chloroform Extract (mm) | Aqueous Extract (mm) | Cipr (mm) | DMSO (mm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recipe 2 |
| 12.46 ± 0.32 | 8.70 ± 0.16 | 12.73 ± 0.12 | 8.66 ± 0.16 | 20 | - |
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - | |
|
| 12.30 ± 0.16 | 12.50 ± 0.16 | 20.06 ± 0.16 | 10.30 ± 0.16 | 33 | - | |
|
| 11.23 ± 0.16 | 14.60 ± 0.08 | 12.40 ± 0.08 | 0 | 31 | - | |
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - | |
|
| 14.30 ± 0.16 | 9.30 ± 0.16 | 13.43 ± 0.16 | 14.2 ± 0.16 | 32 | - | |
|
| 12.46 ± 0.12 | 20.30 ± 0.16 | 14.30 ± 0.24 | 16.26 ± 0.20 | 32 | - | |
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - | |
|
| 8.56 ± 0.40 | 10.70 ± 0.16 | 10.03 ± 0.12 | 18.56 ± 0.24 | 33 | - | |
|
| 15.36 ± 0.24 | 15.30 ± 0.16 | 17.16 ± 0.16 | 13.26 ± 0.16 | 33 | - | |
|
| 10.36 ± 0.24 | 8.70 ± 0.16 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - | |
|
| 12.70 ± 0.16 | 11.60 ± 0.08 | 12.63 ± 0.20 | 13.70 ± 0.16 | 34 | - |
Note: ANOVA value (p < 0.01) for all samples.
Figure 3Comparative antibacterial activities of methanol, ethanol, chloroform and aqueous extracts of the L. usitatissimum (seeds), H. officinalis (flowers) and E. vulgaris (dry branches) and their Recipe 2. Each column represents the mean value of three independent replicates and the error bars indicate standard deviation.
Metals in herbal plants and in their Recipe 2 e.g., Cd, Ni, Fe, Pb, Zn, Cu and Cr.
| Recipe/Plant (parts used) | Fe (mg/kg) | Zn (mg/kg) | Cu (mg/kg) | Pb (mg/kg) | Cr (mg/kg) | Ni (mg/kg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recipe 2 | 121.11 ± 0.680 | 60.81 ± 0.021 | 17.70 ± 0.024 | 65.37 ± 0.343 | 196.56 ± 0.960 | 0.93 ± 0.016 |
|
| 45.03 ± 0.045 | 67.59 ± 0.016 | 16.17 ± 0.039 | 57.93 ± 0.255 | 182.91 ± 0.244 | 0.54 ± 0.025 |
|
| 299.79 ± 0.084 | 17.19 ± 0.013 | 8.82 ± 0.031 | 68.16 ± 0.088 | 188.07 ± 0.371 | BDL |
|
| 117.51 ± 0.008 | 7.89 ± 0.004 | 3.33 ± 0.024 | 66.81 ± 0.343 | 188.07 ± 0.249 | 0.57 ± 0.003 |
Note: Cd was observed below detection level.
Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of Recipe 1 against different bacterial strains.
| S. No | Bacteria | Methanol Extracts (mg/L) | Aqueous Extracts (mg/L) | Chloroform Extracts (mg/L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
| 9000 | 10,500 | 9000 |
| 2 |
| 10,000 | N/A | 12,000 |
| 3 |
| 11,500 | 12,000 | 14,000 |
Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of Recipe 2 against different bacterial strains.
| S. No | Bacteria | Methanol Extracts (mg/L) | Aqueous Extracts (mg/L) | Chloroform Extracts (mg/L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
| 11,000 | 2000 | 13,000 |
| 2 |
| N/A | N/A | N/A |
| 3 |
| 11,500 | 13,500 | 8000 |