| Literature DB >> 36254172 |
Abstract
Historically, natural products have been the principal source of medications for the treatment of human diseases. Traditional medical practitioners employ Detarium microcarpum as a treatment for diabetes, malaria, wounds, inflammation, and even cancer. This study emphasizes the importance of harmonizing D. microcarpum research so that results from various sources may be directly compared to reach a scientific conclusion. We searched Google Scholar, Science Direct, Google.com, Wiley, PubMed, Hindawi, and Springer for research papers on Detarium microcarpum. This analysis excludes untrustworthy online data, thesis papers, and review publications on D. microcarpum. The leaves and stem bark were shown to have high antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, antibacterial, antidiabetic, and anticancer properties. The study also discovered that too much consumption is harmful. Polyphenols and flavonoids were the most commonly reported compounds. However, human safety and efficacy are yet to be fully evaluated, and further well-designed clinical trials are needed to confirm preclinical findings. The leaves and stem bark extracts and isolated compound mechanism of action should be investigated. It is necessary to set a standard dose and ensure its safety.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36254172 PMCID: PMC9569227 DOI: 10.1155/2022/7219401
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Adv Pharmacol Pharm Sci ISSN: 2633-4690
Figure 1(a) branch (source author), (b) leaves displaying fruit [17], and (c) single leaf (source author).
Chemical composition of Detarium microcarpum.
| S/N | Compound | Composition | Part of the plant | Solvent | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Cyclohexanone | 1.4 | Seeds | Petroleum ether | [ |
| cis-Rose oxide | 0.5 | ||||
| Citronellol | 8.7 | ||||
|
| 1.4 | ||||
| Camphor | 0.2 | ||||
| Isoledene | 1.4 | ||||
| Oleic acid | 30.8 | ||||
| Palmitic acid | 0.2 | ||||
| E-citral | 1.3 | ||||
| Linoleic acid | 44.1 | ||||
|
| |||||
| 2 | Nonane | 6.52 | Seeds | Chloroform | [ |
| 3,5-Di-tert-butylphenol | 0.37 | ||||
| 4-Methyldecane | 1.27 | ||||
| Isopropylbenzene | 1.55 | ||||
| Decane | 7.66 | ||||
| Undecane | 1.44 | ||||
| Hexadecane | 0.60 | ||||
| 3,3-Dimethyl-1-(2-carboxyphenyl) triazene | 0.59 | ||||
| 2,4-Decadienal | 0.49 | ||||
| 2,6,11-Trimethyldodecane | 1.11 | ||||
| Hexadecanoic acid | 9.77 | ||||
| Tetradecanoic acid | 2.48 | ||||
| Hexadecane | 1.06 | ||||
| 9-Octadecenoic acid | 39.24 | ||||
| Sulfurous acid,2-ethylhexyl isohexyl ester | 1.49 | ||||
| 9,12,15-Octadecatrienoic acid | 6.21 | ||||
| Pentafluoropropionic acid and hexadecyl ester | 1.33 | ||||
| Octadecanoic acid | 8.12 | ||||
| 2,6,10,14,18,22-Tetracosahexaene (squalene) | 0.66 | ||||
| 2-Methyl-3,13-octadecadienol | 3.80 | ||||
| Docosanoic acid | 1.98 | ||||
| Sulfurous acid, octadecyl-2-propyl ester | 2.27 | ||||
|
| |||||
| 3 | 5 | Fruits pulp | Dichloromethane | [ | |
| 3,4-Dihydroxy clerodan-13E-en 15-oic acid (4) | |||||
| 2-Oxokolavenic acid (3) | |||||
| 3,4-Epoxy clerodan-13E-en-15-oic acid (1), | |||||
| 3,4-Dihydro clerodan-13z-en-15-oic acid (5) | |||||
|
| |||||
| 4 | Calcium | 17.97 | Fruits pulp (mg/100 g) | [ | |
| Chromium | 0.44 | ||||
| Cobalt | 0.06 | ||||
| Iron | 78.71 | ||||
| Potassium | 908.1 | ||||
| Copper | 0.59 | ||||
| Iodine 2 | 2.77 | ||||
| Manganese | 5.95 | ||||
| Molybdenum | 6.39 | ||||
| Sulphur | 37.24 | ||||
| Magnesium | 113.50 | ||||
| Phosphorous | 204.5 | ||||
| Zinc | 31.7 | ||||
| Sodium | 15.09 | ||||
| Cadmium | 0.03 | ||||
| Nickel | 1.57 | ||||
| Titanium | 0.36 | ||||
| Lanthanum | 0.09 | ||||
| Barium | 0.58 | ||||
| Strontium | 0.25 | ||||
| Lead | 0.002 | ||||
| Arsenic | 0.44 | ||||
| Vitamin B2 | 4.20 | Mg/100 g | |||
| Vitamin C | 55.10 | Mg/100 g | |||
| Folic acid | 0.17 | Mg/100 g | |||
| Vitamin E | 12.44 | Mg/100 g | |||
| Ash | 4.47 | ||||
| Crude fibre | 12.19 | % | |||
| Crude fat | 2.23 | % | |||
| Total carbohydrate | 65.8 | % | |||
| Crude protein | 4.68 | % | |||
| Cyanide | 0.07 | Mg/100 g | |||
| Saponins | 2.73 | Mg/100 g | |||
| Phytates | 0.41 | Mg/100 g | |||
| Tannins | 0.17 | Mg/100 g | |||
| Oxalate | 1.06 | Mg/100 g | |||
| Tannins | Present | Seeds | [ | ||
| Flavonoids | |||||
| Alkaloids | |||||
| Fatty acids | |||||
| Saponins | |||||
| Phenol | |||||
| Steroid | |||||
| Protein | 29.4 | Fruits % | [ | ||
| Fat | 1.59 | ||||
| Moisture | 5.74 | ||||
| Ash | 2.6 | ||||
| Fiber | 19.05 | ||||
| Carbohydrate | 41.6 | ||||
| Potassium | 1463.25 | Mg/100 g | [ | ||
| Magnesium | 12.20 | ||||
| Sodium | 420.50 | ||||
| Calcium | 136.12 | ||||
| Iron | 2.73 | ||||
| Zinc | 0.41 | ||||
| Phosphorous | 1.05 | ||||
| Manganese | 2.65 | ||||
| Copper | 0.35 | ||||
| Nickel | 0.001 | ||||
| Cobalt | 2.71 | ||||
| Cadmium | 0.002 | ||||
| Aluminium | 1.12 | ||||
| Alkaloids | 0.37 | Seeds % | [ | ||
| Tannins | 0.47 | ||||
| Saponins | 1.85 | ||||
| Flavonoids | 2.28 | ||||
| Phenols | 0.35 | ||||
| Alkaloids | 0.72 | Stem bark % | |||
| Saponins | 4.60 | ||||
| Flavonoids | 5.68 | ||||
| Tannins | 0.79 | ||||
| Phenols | 0.67 | ||||
| Magnesium | 0.32 | Seeds % | |||
| Potassium | 0.50 | ||||
| Calcium | 1.44 | ||||
| Phosphorus | 1.0 | ||||
| Sodium | 0.53 | ||||
| Iron | 7.11 | ||||
| Zinc | 5.40 | ||||
| Manganese | 0.45 | ||||
| Potassium | 0.50 | Stem bark % | |||
| Magnesium | 0.40 | ||||
| Sodium | 0.40 | ||||
| Calcium | 1.44 | ||||
| Phosphorous | 0.54 | ||||
| Manganese | 0.70 | ||||
| Iron | 6.97 | ||||
| Zinc | 6.15 | ||||
| Riboflavin | 0.62 | Seeds mg/100 g | |||
| Ascorbic acid | 83.6 | ||||
| Thiamin | 0.14 | ||||
| Niacin | 2.60 | ||||
| Ascorbic acid | 24.2 | Stem bark mg/100 g | |||
| Riboflavin | 0.67 | ||||
| Niacin | 8.11 | ||||
| Thiamin | 0.27 | ||||
| Crude protein | 20.5 | Seeds % | |||
| Fats/oil | 55.6 | ||||
| Crude fiber | 10.5 | ||||
| Food energy g/calories | 616 | ||||
| Ash | 840 | ||||
| Carbohydrate | 840 | ||||
| Food energy g/calories | 324.6 | Stem bark % | |||
| Fats/oil | 55.6 | ||||
| Crude protein | 9.6 | ||||
| Ash | 5 | ||||
| Crude fiber | 17.8 | ||||
| Carbohydrate | 63.54 | ||||
| Protein | 27.1 | Seed % | [ | ||
| 3-octanone | 0.229 | Leaves | [ | ||
| Linalol | 2.098 | ||||
| Myrcene | 0.064 | ||||
| Borneol | 0.161 | ||||
|
| 0.351 | ||||
|
| 0.357 | ||||
| Safranal | 0.407 | ||||
| Geraniol | 0.227 | ||||
| 1,2-dihydro-trimethyl-naphtalene | 0.339 | ||||
|
| 1.238 | ||||
|
| 0.357 | ||||
|
| 0.758 | ||||
|
| 0.883 | ||||
|
| 0.477 | ||||
|
| 11.894 | ||||
| Neryl acetone | 2.452 | ||||
|
| 0.368 | ||||
| Neryl acetone | 2.452 | ||||
|
| 1.589 | ||||
|
| 1.108 | ||||
|
| 0.605 | ||||
| Germacrene-D | 0.597 | ||||
|
| 1.13 | ||||
|
| 1.027 | ||||
|
| 0.73 | ||||
| Intermedeol | 1.208 | ||||
| Caryophyllene oxide | 28.186 | ||||
| Salvia-4 (14)-ene-1-one | 2.243 | ||||
| Iso-spathulenol | 0.989 | ||||
|
| 1.254 | ||||
| Spathulenol | 1.886 | ||||
| Humulene-1,2-epoxide | 4.05 | ||||
| 1-Naphthaleneacetic-5-carboxy-l,2,3,4,4a,7,8,8a-octahydro-1,2,4a-trimethyl acid | Bark | Chloroform | [ | ||
| l-Naphthaleneacetic-7-oxo-l,2,3,4,4a,7,8,8a-octahydro 1,2,4a, stetramethyl acid | |||||
| 2-Oxo-kolavenic acid | |||||
| Moisture (%) | 4.98 | Seed | [ | ||
| Protein (%) | 14.22 | [ | |||
| Ash | 2.54 | ||||
| Crude fat % | 8.43 | ||||
| Sodium | 28.29 | Mg/kg | |||
| Calcium | 2700 | ||||
| Potassium | 23900 | ||||
| Magnesium | 700 | ||||
| Iron | 6 | ||||
| Zinc | 0.4 | ||||
| Manganese | 1.7 | ||||
| Copper | 0.2 | ||||
| Moisture content (%) | 4.69 | [ | |||
| Organic matter content (%) | 97.23 | [ | |||
| Protein content (%) | 35.96 | ||||
| Ash content (%) | 2.77 | ||||
| Lysine | 2.14 | g/100 g | |||
| Leucine | 2.35 | ||||
| Valine | 2.13 | ||||
| Isoleucine | 2.35 | ||||
| Phenylalamine | 2.58 | ||||
| Methionine | 0.74 | ||||
| Threonine | 2.17 | ||||
| Arginine | 5.66 | ||||
| Cystine | 1.07 | ||||
| Glutamic acid | 9.78 | ||||
| Aspartic acid | 4.79 | ||||
|
| 2.41 | ||||
| Histidine | 1.13 | ||||
| Tyrosine | 1.06 | ||||
| Proline | 2.09 | ||||
| Serine | 3.12 | ||||
| Alanine | 2.10 | ||||
| Potassium | 105 | [ | |||
| Sodium | 002 | ||||
| Calcium | 0.23 | ||||
| Iron | 003 | ||||
| Phosphorus | 001 | ||||
| Sulphur | 001 | ||||
| Iodine | 5.420 | ||||
| Manganese | 2.78 | ||||
| Chromium | 0.96 | ||||
| Molybdenum | 0.67 | ||||
| Selenium | 0.035 | ||||
| Zinc | 0.635 | ||||
| Lead | 0.074 | ||||
| Arsenic | 0.051 | ||||
| Copper | 0.127 | ||||
| Tin | 0.362 | ||||
| Nickel | 0.18 | ||||
| Vanadium | 0.753 | ||||
| Bromine | 0.023 | ||||
| Cobalt | 0.817 | ||||
| Strontium | 0.083 | ||||
| Rubidium | 0.914 | ||||
| Zirconium | 0.025 | ||||
| Thallium | 1.960 | ||||
| Niobium | 0.017 | ||||
| Yttrium | 0.063 | ||||
| Sitosterol 3-O-(6′-O-palmitoyl-2,3,4-O-triacetyl-beta-D-glycopyranoside) 1, | Bark | Ethanol | [ | ||
| Lupeol | |||||
| Lup-20 (29)-ene-2alpha,3beta-diol | |||||
| Stigmasterol | |||||
| Campesterol | |||||
| L-Quino-1,5-lactone | Bark | Ethanol | [ | ||
| D-(−)-bornesitol | |||||
| Myo-inositol | |||||
| D-pinitol | |||||
| Sucrose | |||||
| D-glucose | |||||
| D-Fructose benzoates | |||||
| Hexanedioic acid | Root | [ | |||
| Mono (2-ethylhexyl) ester | |||||
| 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid | Bark | ||||
| Mono (2-ethylhexyl) ester | |||||
| D-Mannose | [ | ||||
| D-Glucose | |||||
| Labdane diterpenoid | Root | Ethanol/water (7 : 3) | [ | ||
| Microcarpin (1) | |||||
| Microcarpamide ( | |||||
| 5-(Carboxymethyl)-5,6, | |||||
| 8a-Trimethyl-3,4,4a,5,6,7,8,8a | |||||
| Octahydronaphthalene-1-carboxylic acid ( | |||||
| Microcarposide ( | |||||
| Rhinocerotinoic acid ( | |||||
| 1,7-Dihydroxy-6-methylxanthone ( | |||||
| Ursolic acid (7), | |||||
| 3 | |||||
| Alphitolic acid (9), | |||||
| Stigmasterol glucoside (10) | |||||
| Gallic acid | Leaves | Methanol | [ | ||
| Quercetin 3,7-O-dirhamnoside | |||||
| Myricetin 3-O-rhamnoside | |||||
| Quercetin 3-O-glucoside | |||||
| Quercetin 3-O-rhamnoside | |||||
| Iron | 218.9 | Stem bark mg/kg | [ | ||
| Manganese | 139 | ||||
| Zinc | 48.9 | ||||
| Methyl gallate | Stem bark | 70% Methanol. | [ | ||
| Catechin gallate | |||||
| 3,13E-Clerodien-15-oic acid, 4 (18) | Leaves | Methanol | [ | ||
| 13E-Clerodien-15-oic acid, 18-oxo-3 | |||||
| 13E-Clerodien-15-oic acid and 2-oxo-3, | |||||
| 13E-Clerodien-15-oic acid | |||||
| Alkaloids | Stem bark | Methanol | [ | ||
| Flavonoids | |||||
| Glycosides | |||||
| Triterpene | |||||
| Saponins | |||||
| Tannins | |||||
| Indole alkaloid | Stem bark | Methanol | [ | ||
| Quinoline alkaloids | |||||
| Steroids | |||||
| Steroids | |||||
| Tropane alkaloids | |||||
| Flavonoids | |||||
| Tannins | |||||
| Tannins, | Stembark | Ethanol | [ | ||
| Saponin, | |||||
| Steroids, | |||||
| Flavonoids, | |||||
| Glycosides, | |||||
| Phenols | |||||
| Terpenoids. | |||||
| Microcarposide ( | Fruits | [ | |||
| Lupeol ( | |||||
| Betulinic acid ( | |||||
|
| |||||
| Methyl gallate ( | |||||
| Luteolin ( | |||||
| Epicatechin ( | |||||
Notes: S/N = Serial Number.
Figure 2Compounds responsible for the biological activity of the Detarium microcarpum: (a) protocatechuic, (b) hexanedioic acid, (c) Lup-20 (29)-ene-2alpha, 3beta-diol, (d) lupeol, (e) stigmasterol, (f) campesterol, (g) myo-inositol, (h) sucrose, (i) vanillic, (j) myricetin 3-O-rhamnoside, (k) quercetin 3-O-glucoside, and (l) methyl gallate.
Antioxidant activity of D. microcarpum.
| S/N | Method | Solvents | Part of the plant | Major findings | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | The standard comet assay | Ethanol | Fruit pulp | DNA integrity was unaffected by fruit pulp extract at concentrations of up to 500 | [ |
| 2 |
| Ethanol | Fruits | DPPH, deoxyribose degradation, and lipid peroxidation models showed that ethanolic fruit extract had remarkable antioxidant properties with IC50 values of 49.87, 69.06, and 49.36 | [ |
| 3 | Lipid peroxidation activity | Methanol | Leaves | FeSO4/SNP were found to have an inhibitory effect on lipid peroxidation in the brain, liver, and colon when the extract was used as a pro-oxidant. Malondialdehyde content was significantly increased in the colon. | [ |
| 4 | DPPH, FRAP | Essential oil (leaves) | The essential oil extracted from the leaves showed the highest radical scavenging activity with IC50 value of 21.99 | [ | |
| 5 | Hydrogen peroxide and nitric oxide radical-scavenging assays | Ethanol | Fruit pulp | IC50 values of 90 | [ |
| 6 |
| Ethyl-acetate and n-butanol | Stem bark | Significantly improved liver damage and decreased ALT, AST, TBIL, and CBIL values. SML or SMS extracts considerably enhanced glutathione levels in the cell, catalase and superoxide dismutase activities, and greatly lowered reactive thiobarbituric acid components. | [ |
| 7 |
| Fruits pulp | Inhibiting the activity of the enzyme acetylcholinesterase responsible for Alzheimer's disease. | [ | |
| 8 |
| 70% methanol | Leaf | At all doses used, extracts considerably outperformed the reference compounds in terms of radical scavenging activity (IC50) at 15 | [ |
| 9 |
| Ethanol | Leaves | The ethanolic extract's ability to neutralize free radicals with an IC50 value of 4.84 mg/mL. | [ |
| 10 |
| Methanol and aqueous | Stem bark | The DPPH and ABTS tests had a high degree of correlation ( | [ |
| 11 |
| Methanol | Seeds | All methods were found to be significant with FRAP exhibiting the highest scavenging activity at 2.1 mg GAE/g | [ |
| 12 | DPPH, ORAC | Methanol | Leaves | Both DPPH and ORAC experiments found that the methanolic extract of the leaves had a significant radical scavenging capacity of 937 16 and 2247 63 | [ |
Notes: ALT = alanine aminotransferase, AST = aspartate transaminase, S/N = serial number, D. microcarpum = Detarium microcarpum, FRAP = ferric reducing antioxidant power, TBIL = total bilirubin, DPPH = 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl, 2,20-azino-bis-3-ethyl-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulphonate, SRASA = superoxide radical anion scavenging assay, DDA = deoxyribose degradation and LPM = lipid peroxidation models, ABTS = radical cation scavenging assay, ORAC = oxygen radical absorbance capacity, IC50 = the half maximal inhibitory concentration, and TBIL = total bilirubin test.
Anti-inflammatory activity of D. microcarpum.
| S/N | Method | Solvents | Part of the plant | Major findings | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
| n-hexane, ethylacetate, methanol, and aqueous | Leaf | Methanolic leaves extract showed the highest acute inflammatory activity at | [ |
| 2 |
| Methanol | Stem bark | When injected intraperitoneally in mice, the LD50 of the extract was 471.2 mg/kg body weight and ≥5000 mg/kg body weight. The methanolic extract reduced the mean diameter of the rat paw in carrageenan-induced inflammation when compared to the normal saline-treated group. | [ |
| 3 |
| Methanol | Leaf | The results indicate that the methanol leaf extract exhibits considerable dose-dependent anti-inflammatory action against egg albumin and formalin-induced inflammation at | [ |
| 4 |
| n-Hexane, ethylacetate, methanol, and aqueous | Leaf | Methanolic leaves extract showed the highest inhibition analgesic activity at 88% | [ |
| 5 |
| Aqueous | Stem bark | Plasma activity was significantly lower in the groups treated with the extract at | [ |
Notes: S/N = serial number and LD50 = lethal dose.
Antibacterial activity of D. microcarpum.
| S/N | Method | Solvents | Part of the plant | Major findings | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Agar-disc | Ethanol | Leaves |
| [ |
| 2 | Agar well diffusion | Ethanol | Stem bark | At various doses of 100, 50, 25, and 12 mg/mL, respectively, the stem bark ethanolic extracts showed antibacterial activity against the studied species, with | [ |
| 3 |
| Methanol | Stem bark | The stem bark extract were highly active against the test strains, exhibiting substantial efficacy at 25 | [ |
| 4 | Microdilution | Methanol | Fruits |
| [ |
| 5 | Broth dilution, | Ethanol | Root bark | Ethanolic root bark extract and the isolated compound rhinocerotinoic acid showed good efficacy | [ |
| 6 | Agar and disc diffusion | Petroleum ether | Seeds | Seeds were found to be significant against all eight tested strains with the highest zone of inhibition against | [ |
| 7 | Ager plate | Petroleum ether, chloroform, and ethanol | Bark | The ethanolic bark extract exhibited the highest activity against | [ |
| 8 | MIC | Stem bark | Catechin gallate and methyl gallate compound 2 (MIC 200 | [ | |
| 9 | Agar disk diffusion and broth micro dilution | Essential oil | The extract showed moderate and strong inhibition zones of 12 and 22 mm against all of the tested microbial strains, respectively. | [ | |
| 10 | Ager well | n-hexane, ethyl acetate, chloroform, and methanol | Stem bark | Stem bark extract exhibited strong activity against | [ |
| 11 | MIC | Dichloromethane and methanol | The dicholoromethane extract of | [ | |
| 12 |
| Ethanol | Stem barks and seeds | The greatest inhibitory concentration was 100 mg/mL in proteus mirabilis, with an 8-mm inhibition zone. | [ |
| 13 |
| Petroleum ether | Seed | The extract exhibited the growth of all tested bacteria significantly | [ |
| 14 | Aqueous and methanol | Seeds | Highest zone of inhibition was recorded | [ |
Notes: S/N = serial number and MIC = minimum inhibitory concentrations.
Antifungal activity of D. microcarpum.
| S/N | Method | Solvents | Part of the plant | Major findings | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Petroleum ether | Seed | The extract inhibited the growth of all tested fungal significantly | [ | |
| 2 | Fruits pulp | Inhibited the growth of the tested fungal strain at 100 | [ | ||
| 3 | Hexane, methanol | Stem bark | The methanolic stem bark exhibited the highest inhibition against | [ | |
| 4 | Aqueous | Stem bark | The extract protects against castor oil-induced diarrhea by 53%, compared to the standard 91%. | [ | |
| 5 | Aqueous | Stem bark | The aqueous extract alone lowered the contractile amplitude of jejunal tissue dosage independently. Additionally, the aqueous extract lowered the contractile amplitude of an isolated jejunal segment subjected to 0.2 ml of acetylcholine at a concentration of 10 | [ |
Notes: S/N = serial number.
Antiparasitic activity of D. microcarpum.
| S/N | Method | Solvents | Part of the plant | Major findings | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Antiparasitic | Methanol | Stem bark | For the 200, 400, and 800 mg/kg tested doses, the methanolic stem bark extract had a significant ( | [ |
| 2 | Methanol | Leaf | When compared to the negative control, the methanolic leaf extract significantly reduced the average % of parasitemia level in the treatment group. At doses of 250, 500, and 1000 mg/kg, the extract cleared parasites at 83.52, 86.65, and 87.21%, respectively. | [ | |
| 3 | Methanol | Leaves | After 14 days of treatment, both doses of the extract administered significantly reduced parasitemia. On the other hand, neither dose of the extract reversed trypanosome-induced anaemia. Similarly, the extract was unable to improve hepatomegaly and splenomegaly caused by trypanosomes. | [ | |
| 4 | Methanol | Leaves | The observed result indicated that the methanolic leaf extract possesses trypano suppressive action, implying that it may be employed as a candidate for the development of medications to treat disorders caused by trypanosomes. | [ | |
| 5 | Methanol | Leaf | The methanolic leaf extract's of oral LD50 was determined to be greater than 5000 mg/kg. At all doses examined, the extract had substantial curative, suppressive, and preventive effects at | [ | |
| 6 | Methanol and aqueous | Stem bark | Both the aqueous and methanolic stem bark extracts inhibited larval mobility in | [ | |
|
| Methanol | Stem bark | At a concentration of 10 | [ |
Notes: S/N = serial number.
Antidiabetic activity of D. microcarpum.
| S/N | Method | Solvents | Part of the plant | Major findings | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Aqueous | dAgNps (leaves) | It was determined that dAgNps suppressed PANC-1 in the cell viability assay, with IC50 values of 84 | [ | |
| 2 |
| Aqueous | Seeds | There was no substantial health risk associated with the administration of 200 mg·kg−1 of the methanolic seeds extract, alone or in combination with | [ |
| 3 |
| Root | The root extract considerably lowered the blood sugar levels of alloxan diabetic rats at ( | [ | |
| 4 |
| Methanol | Leaf | At 500, 750, and 1000 mg/kg body weight, the methanolic leaf extract significantly reduced blood glucose levels. Compared to diabetic rats administered with the conventional medication (glibenclimide), the extract significantly increased the body weight at ( | [ |
| 5 |
| n-Hexane, ethyl acetate, and 70% methanol | Stem bark | The extracts were found to have anti-implantation activity, which supports its usage as a contraceptive in traditional medicine. | [ |
| 6 |
| 70% methanol | Leaf | On-amylase and -glucosidase IC50 of leaf extracts at 63 and 158 | [ |
| 7 |
| Aqueous | Seeds | The seeds' extract lowers postprandial blood glucose and insulin levels in humans. | [ |
| 8 |
| Aqueous | Seeds | Significant reductions in blood sugar and cholesterol levels were observed with the seed extract. The extract exhibited no influence on haematological or blood chemistry indicators, demonstrating its safety. | [ |
| 9 |
| Methanol | Leaf | When compared to glibenclamide, methanol leaf extract (200 and 400 mg/kg body weight) caused a significant dose-dependent drop in blood sugar levels, 20.62 and 40.75%, respectively, and a considerable recovery of body weight in diabetic rats after four hours of administration (57.49%) was observed. | [ |
| 10 |
| Gum | The results indicated that detarium gum is a superior excipient for the formulation of metformin mucoadhesive delivery systems. Additionally, gum has shown a promising antidiabetic impact and should be taken with caution, since it may result in abnormally low blood glucose levels. | [ | |
| 11 |
| Methanol | Seed | The methanolic seed extract lowered alpha-amylase and glucosidase at 69.3 and 31.1 mg/mL, respectively | [ |
| 12 |
| Bread | Reduced incremental blood glucose and postprandial glucose levels by a statistically significant amount at | [ |
Notes: S/N = serial number.
Insecticidal potential of D. microcarpum.
| S/N | Method | Solvents | Part of the plant | Major findings | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Wheat wafer disc bioassay | n-Hexane, and methanol | Leaves, stem, and root barks | With an LC50 value of 47 | [ |
| 2 | Paper disk | Methanol | Leaves | 3,13E-clerodien-15-oic acid, 4 (18), 13E-clerodien-15-oic acid, 18-oxo-3,13E-clerodien-15-oic acid, and 2-oxo-3,13E-clerodien-15-oic acid are the active chemicals. Except for the latter, this is the first report of these compounds from D. microcarpum. The four compounds had considerable antifeedant activity at 1%. | [ |
Notes: S/N = serial number.
Anticancer activity of D. microcarpum.
| S/N | Method | Solvents | Part of the plant | Major findings | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9 | Presto blue cell viability assay | Methanol and aqueous | Stem bark | The IC50 values for the methanol and aqueous extracts of the three plants inhibiting MCF7 cell growth ranged from 78 to >500 | [ |
| Aqueous | Leaf and stem | The leaf extracts inhibited the cancer cell, the percentage inhibition increased as well, reaching 89.47% optimal dosage of 100 mg/cm3. However, this research has revealed leaf's promise as a cancer therapeutic, particularly in developing nations, and has brought new knowledge to science. | [ | ||
| Aqueous | dAgNps (leaves) | HeLa cell growth was decreased by dAgNps with IC50 values of 31.5 | [ |
Notes: S/N = serial number.
Toxicity evaluation of D. microcarpum.
| S/N | Method | Solvents | Part of the plant | Major findings | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
| Methanol | Leaf | Toxicological tests have established that a dose of 5000 mg/kg of methanolic leaf extract is safe. | [ |
| 2 |
| 70% methanol | Stem bark | According to the study, prolonged use of the extract in the management of medical conditions may have a harmful effect on certain essential organs. | [ |
| 3 |
| Aqueous | Stem bark | It may be concluded that supplementation with aqueous stem bark extract was useful in moderating the changes in liver, kidney, and serum variables of rats exposed to mycotoxins. | [ |
| 4 |
| Methanol | Stem bark | The methanolic stem bark extract, which reveals that prolonged use of the extract in the therapy of disease conditions may be related to some unfavourable effects on some essential organs. | [ |
| 5 |
| Aqueous | Fruit | Fruit flour was nutritious as a food additive up to 30% without causing clinical indications or death. | [ |
| 6 |
| n-butanol | Stem bark | All treatment groups had a substantial decrease in relative liver weight at | [ |
| 7 |
| Fruits | The results of this experiment indicate that the fruit of | [ | |
| 8 |
| Seeds | The inclusion of the seeds in the diet, had no effect on the haematological and biochemical indicators at | [ | |
| 9 |
| Fruits | Increased incorporation of seeds, reduced weight gain and FCR in a linear fashion. Birds fed 10%, 15%, and 20% diets had lower haematological and serum biochemical indices than those fed 5% and control diets at | [ | |
| 10 | BST | Methanol | Stem bark | It was shown that the LC50 for brine shrimp larvae was 158.49 g/mL for the methanolic extract of the stem bark. The results show that | [ |
| 11 | MTT | Hexane, chloroform, ethyl acetate, and methanol | Fruits pulp | The chloroform and ethyl acetate extracts of | [ |
| 12 | MTT | Ethanolic | Fruit pulp | Human lymphocytes were not harmed by the fruit pulp ethanol extract. The cytotoxicity of hydrogen peroxide and tert-butyl hydroperoxide to human lymphocytes was also dramatically lowered by pretreatment with fruit extracts. In terms of cytoprotective efficacy, both the extract and ascorbic acid were comparable at | [ |
| 13 |
| Methanol | Stem bark | Mice died at concentrations of 2900 mg/Kg and 1600 mg/kg body weight from the methanolic stem bark extract, with an LD50 value of 3,807.89 mg/kg. Experiments with extracts of these plants have yielded a good dose guidance for an ongoing antimalarial study. | [ |
| 14 | Brine shrimp lethality test | Dichloromethane and methanol | The methanol extract of | [ | |
| 15 |
| Methanolic | Leaf | The methanolic leaf extract showed that none of the organs showed any histological changes during the monitoring period. | [ |
| 16 |
| Ethanol | Fruits | The fruit's antioxidant molecules scavenging the hydroxyl radical, as well as the peroxyl and alkoxyl radicals produced by lipid peroxidation had a gene protective impact. | [ |
| 17 |
| Methanolic | Leaf | The oral LD50 of the extract was determined to be greater than 5000 mg/kg of body weight. There were no significant differences between the therapy groups when it came to renal function and haematological analysis. | [ |
Notes: S/N = serial number.
Figure 3Diagrammatic presentation of how man utilises plants leads to the development of modern drugs and herbal formulations.
Figure 4Hypoglycaemic mechanism of Detarium microcarpum and effect on target tissues. A = pancreas; B = liver; C = intestine; D = adipose tissue; and E = muscle tissue.
Figure 5Schematic presentation of Detarium microcarpum to target cancer cells. A = Detarium microcarpum; B = crude extract; C = pure compound; D = cancer cell; E = organ with cancer cell; and F = treated human.