| Literature DB >> 35197733 |
Gunasekaran Suriyakala1, Sivaji Sathiyaraj1, Sandhanasamy Devanesan2, Mohamad S AlSalhi2, Aruliah Rajasekar3, Murali Kannan Maruthamuthu4, Ranganathan Babujanarthanam1.
Abstract
Jatropha integerrima Jacq. flower extract was used for the synthesis of silver nanoparticles in the current study. Various spectroscopic analyses were used to characterize the synthesized nanoparticles (JIF-AgNPs). The antibacterial efficacy of JIF-AgNPs was studied by well diffusion and microdilution techniques. In addition, the impact of JIF-AgNPs on free radicals was evaluated. On the ultraviolet-visible spectrum, the nanoparticles exhibit the highest absorbance at 422 nm. Based on the Fourier transform infrared spectrum, phenols and amino acids were involved in capping the JIF-AgNPs. Crystalline sphere-shaped nanoparticles with an average size of 50.07 nm and zeta potential of -19.0 mV were confirmed by X-ray diffraction, transmission electron microscopy, and dynamic light scattering analysis respectively. The JIF-AgNPs exhibit the highest and lowest growth inhibitory activity towards E. coli and B. subtilis. The minimal inhibitory concentration of JIF-AgNPs against E. coli, K. pneumoniae, S. aureus, and B. subtilis were 2.5, 5.0, 5.0, and 7.5 μg/mL, respectively. The JIF-AgNPs exhibited significant radical scavenging activities against DPPH (IC50-32.5 ± 0.06 µg/mL), hydroxyl (IC50-25 ± 0.09 µg/mL), Superoxide (IC50-42.5 ± 0.13 µg/mL), and ABTs (IC50-33.5 ± 0.15 µg/mL). Thus, synthesized nanoparticles were a good alternative to develop an antibacterial and antioxidant agent.Entities:
Keywords: E. coli; Jatropha integerrima Jacq.; Silver nanoparticles; Superoxide; X-ray diffraction
Year: 2021 PMID: 35197733 PMCID: PMC8848134 DOI: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2021.12.007
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Saudi J Biol Sci ISSN: 2213-7106 Impact factor: 4.219
Phytochemical analysis of . “+” denotes the existence of the compounds; “-” indicates an absence of the compounds, “++” indicates the presence of a compound with a high concentration.
| 1. | Alkaloid | Hager’s test | Formation of yellow precipitate | _ |
| 2. | Anthocyanin | Sodium hydroxide test | The appearance of pink to violet color | + |
| 3. | Anthroquinone | Borntrager’s test | The appearance of pink, violet, or red color | _ |
| 4. | Carbohydrate | Molisch’s test | Formation of purple color | + |
| Fehling’s test | Formation of red color | + | ||
| 5. | Coumarin | Sodium hydroxide test | The appearance of yellow color | + |
| 6. | Diterpine | Copper acetate test | The appearance of emerald green | _ |
| 7. | Flavanoid | Alkaline reagent test | The appearance of colorless solution | _ |
| 8. | Glycoside | Sulphuric acid test | Formation of a reddish color. | ++ |
| 9. | Phenol | Ferric chloride test | The appearance of green color | ++ |
| 10. | Phlobatanin | Hydrochloric acid test | Formation of red precipitate | _ |
| 11. | Protein | Xanthoproteic test | The appearance of yellow color | ++ |
| Biuret | The appearance of violet color | ++ | ||
| 12. | Saponin | Foam test | Formation of stable foam | + |
| 13. | Tannin | Braymer’s test | The appearance of green color | + |
| 14. | Terpenoids | Salkowski test | The appearance of deep red color | _ |
Fig. 1A) Visual observation of JIF-AgNPs. B) UV–Visible spectrum of JIF-AgNPs.
Fig. 2FTIR spectrum of green synthesized silver nanoparticles.
Fig. 3Crystalline peaks of JIF-AgNPs.
Fig. 4A) Spherical shaped nanoparticles. B) Size distribution histogram C) SAED pattern of JIF-AgNPs. D) EDX spectrum.
Fig. 5A) Particle size of JIF-AgNPs. B) Stability of JIF-AgNPs.
Fig. 6Antibacterial activity of JIF-AgNPs against selected pathogenic bacteria at different concentrations.
ZOI of JIF-AgNPs against selected pathogenic bacteria at various concentrations. Data were expressed as means ± standard error of data from three repeats.
| 29.33 ± 0.67 | 14.67 ± 0.33 | 17.66 ± 0.67 | 19.67 ± 0.33 | 23.33 ± 0.58 | |
| 31.67 ± 0.33 | 11.67 ± 0.33 | 13.33 ± 0.33 | 14 ± 0.58 | 18.33 ± 0.33 | |
| 17.33 ± 0.33 | 9.67 ± 0.33 | 12 ± 0.58 | 13.33 ± 0.67 | 14.67 ± 0.33 | |
| 15.33 ± 0.33 | 7.33 ± 0.33 | 9.33 ± 0.33 | 11.67 ± 0.33 | 12.67 ± 0.33 | |
MIC of JIF-AgNPs against selected pathogenic strains.
| 1 | ||
| 2 | ||
| 3 | ||
| 4 |
Free radicals scavenging activity of vitamin C and JIF-AgNPs at varied concentrations against various free radicals. Results were expressed as mean ± standard error of data from three repeats. Different superscripts indicate the results were significant based on Duncan’s method (p < 0.05).
| DPPH | 10 µg/mL | 22.48 ± 0.03 f | 16.60 ± 0.09 f |
| 20 µg/mL | 42.62 ± 0.04 d | 22.62 ± 0.10 d | |
| 30 µg/mL | 63.26 ± 0.04 c | 48.62 ± 0.06 c | |
| 40 µg/mL | 76.48 ± 0.26 b | 55.57 ± 0.07 b | |
| 50 µg/mL | 83.44 ± 0.01a | 66.73 ± 0.09 a | |
| IC50 | 24 ± 0.02 | 32.5 ± 0.06 | |
| Hydroxyl | 10 µg/mL | 30.10 ± 0.05 f | 13.25 ± 0.04 f |
| 20 µg/mL | 50.13 ± 0.06 d | 26.76 ± 0.07 d | |
| 30 µg/mL | 65.13 ± 0.08 c | 47.57 ± 0.10 c | |
| 40 µg/mL | 84.28 ± 0.05 ab | 60.51 ± 0.08 b | |
| 50 µg/mL | 89.62 ± 0.09 a | 73.47 ± 0.03 a | |
| IC50 | 19.5 ± 0.04 | 32.5 ± 0.09 | |
| Superoxide | 10 µg/mL | 25.60 ± 0.05 f | 12.54 ± 0.20 f |
| 20 µg/mL | 33.58 ± 0.06 d | 25.42 ± 0.17 d | |
| 30 µg/mL | 59.16 ± 0.06 c | 40.50 ± 0.25 bc | |
| 40 µg/mL | 84.79 ± 0.09 b | 44.48 ± 0.18 b | |
| 50 µg/mL | 96.72 ± 0.11 a | 70.53 ± 0.24 a | |
| IC50 | 24.5 ± 0.03 | 42.5 ± 0.13 | |
| ABTs | 10 µg/mL | 27.70 ± 0.04 f | 19.31 ± 0.15 f |
| 20 µg/mL | 43.78 ± 0.10 d | 33.70 ± 0.18 d | |
| 30 µg/mL | 61.44 ± 0.03 c | 40.53 ± 0.21 c | |
| 40 µg/mL | 76.63 ± 0.08 b | 72.55 ± 0.28 b | |
| 50 µg/mL | 89.51 ± 0.05 a | 78.66 ± 0.14 a | |
| IC50 | 22 ± 0.04 | 33.5 ± 0.15 | |