Open Access


Read more
image01

Online Manuscript Submission


Read more
image01

Submitted Manuscript Trail


Read more
image01

Online Payment


Read more
image01

Online Subscription


Read more
image01

Email Alert



Read more
image01

Original Research Article | OPEN ACCESS

Phytochemical and Antibacterial Evaluations of the Stem Bark of Newbouldia laevis against Isolates from Infected Wounds and Eyes

J O Akerele1, B A Ayinde2 , J Ngiagah1

1Department of Pharmaceutical Microbiology; 2Department of Pharmacognosy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Benin, Benin City, Nigeria.

For correspondence:-  B Ayinde   Email: baayinde@uniben.edu

Received: 3 August 2010        Accepted: 2 February 2011        Published: 20 April 2011

Citation: Akerele JO, Ayinde BA, Ngiagah J. Phytochemical and Antibacterial Evaluations of the Stem Bark of Newbouldia laevis against Isolates from Infected Wounds and Eyes. Trop J Pharm Res 2011; 10(2):211-218 doi: 10.4314/tjpr.v10i2.13

© 2011 The authors.
This is an Open Access article that uses a funding model which does not charge readers or their institutions for access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) and the Budapest Open Access Initiative (http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read), which permit unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited..

Abstract

Purpose: To examine the phytochemical constituents and verify the ethnomedical claim of Newbouldia laevis (P.Beauv.) Seeman ex Bureau Bignoniaceae in treating septic wounds and eye problems.
Methods: Applying standard methods, the phytochemical constituents of the stem bark were examined while the antibacterial potentials of the methanol extract of the stem bark and its organic solvent fractions were tested on clinical bacterial isolates from infected wounds and eyes using the agar - well diffusion method. Ciprofloxacin and gentamicin were used as standard controls. The time-kill kinetics of the methanol stem bark extract and ciprofloxacin were determined using isolates of Staphyloccocus aureus.
Results: Phytochemical screening of the stem bark revealed the presence of flavonoids, tannins, saponins and alkaloids with no traces of cyanogenic glycosides. The 65 bacterial pathogens isolated included Proteus mirabilis (26.0 %) and Pseudomonas aeurginosa (17.4 %) from non-diabetic patients’ wounds; Staphylococcus aureus (32.0 %) and Escherichia coli (16.0%) from diabetic patients’ wounds; Staphylococcus aureus (35.3%) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (35.3 %) from infected eyes. The chloroform fraction was observed to be more active on Gram- negative organisms while the aqueous fraction was more active on Gram-positive organisms. Time-kill kinetics of Staphylococcus aureus showed that the extract was bactericidal (99.9 % killing) at MIC and 2 x MIC after 24 and 3 hours, respectively.
Conclusion: The study has established that the stem bark of Newbouldia laevis has antibacterial activities against bacterial isolates from infected wounds and eyes as claimed in ethnomedicinal practice.

Keywords: Newbouldia laevis, Antibacterial, Phytochemical, Wound isolates, Eye isolates

Impact Factor
Thompson Reuters (ISI): 0.523 (2021)
H-5 index (Google Scholar): 39 (2021)

Article Tools

Share this article with



Article status: Free
Fulltext in PDF
Similar articles in Google
Similar article in this Journal:

Archives

2024; 23: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2023; 22: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2022; 21: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2021; 20: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2020; 19: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2019; 18: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2018; 17: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2017; 16: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2016; 15: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2015; 14: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2014; 13: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2013; 12: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2012; 11: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2011; 10: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2010; 9: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2009; 8: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2008; 7: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2007; 6: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2006; 5: 
1,   2
2005; 4: 
1,   2
2004; 3: 
1
2003; 2: 
1,   2
2002; 1: 
1,   2

News Updates