Antimicrobial Potential of Medicinal Plants extracts

preprint OA: closed CC-BY-4.0
📄 Open PDF Full text JSON View at publisher
AI-generated deep summary by claude@2026-07, 2026-07-04 · read from full text

The preprint evaluated eight ethnobotanically selected medicinal plant taxa for in vitro antimicrobial activity against a panel of human pathogens, using solvent polarity-based extraction, agar diffusion, and CLSI-guided broth microdilution with resazurin confirmation to determine MIC/MBC, alongside cytotoxicity testing in HepG2 cells. Thymus vulgaris and Origanum vulgare emerged as the strongest and most consistent extracts, showing antimicrobial effects linked to membrane disruption (68–72% leakage at 1× MIC), substantial biofilm inhibition (73–78% at 100 µg/mL), rapid bactericidal time–kill activity (≥3 log10 reduction at 24 h), and checkerboard synergy with ciprofloxacin (FICI ~0.42–0.45), with higher total phenolic content correlating with greater potency. Terminalia chebula showed moderate activity, and the authors report a positive association between total phenolics and antimicrobial power. A major caveat is that the work is a preprint and was not peer-reviewed, and it relies on in vitro assays plus a preliminary cell-safety screen rather than in vivo efficacy or toxicity. The paper does not explicitly discuss endometriosis or adenomyosis; it was included in the corpus via a keyword match in the upstream search index.

Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

Abstract Background: The surge of antimicrobial resistance makes it necessary to look for new sources of drugs; medicinal plants still form a supplier of bioactive secondary metabolites for the future. Objectives: The goal of the study was to test the ethnic selected medicinal plants for in vitro activity against a specific group of human pathogens, assess the strength (MIC/MBC), analyse the phytochemistry, examine mechanisms of action and interactions, conduct preliminary toxicity testing on mammalian cells to prioritize the leads for further development. Methods: The polarity series (hexane, ethyl acetate, 70% ethanol, aqueous; hydrodistillation for essential oils) was used to extract eight taxa, which were then subjected to agar diffusion and CLSI-guided broth microdilution (resazurin confirmation) screening. Phytochemical characterization included qualitative tests, total phenolic/flavonoid quantification (TPC/TFC), TLC, HPLC–DAD, and GC–MS. Mechanistic assays included membrane integrity, antibiofilm and quorum-sensing inhibition, time–kill kinetics, and checkerboard synergy with ciprofloxacin. Cytotoxicity (HepG2) determined CC₅₀ and selectivity indices (SI = CC₅₀/MIC). Results: Aromatic, phenolic-molecule-rich extracts—Thymus vulgaris and Origanum vulgare—proved to be the strongest and most reliable antimicrobial agents (zones over 25 mm; MIC₅₀≈31.25 µg/mL; geometric mean MICs≈45–50 µg/mL), they were active in a way that disrupted membranes (leakage of ~68–72% at 1× MIC), Diminution of antibacterial biofilm activity was substantial (~73–78% at 100 µg/mL), rapid bactericidal kinetics (≥3 log₁₀ reduction at 24 h) and synergistic interactions with ciprofloxacin (FICI ≈ 0.42–0.45). Terminalia chebula was the next to be tested with moderate potency (MIC₅₀≈62.5 µg/mL). Very strong positive relationship was noticed between TPC and the antimicrobial power (r≈+0.74 vs zone; r≈−0.71 vs MIC, p<0.01). In safety profiling, the winning ones were Thymus and Origanum (HepG2 CC₅₀≈1,400–1,500 µg/mL; SI≈28–33). Conclusion: Ethnobotanical selection along with standardized assays pointed out Thymus and Origanum as high-priority leads for bioassay-guided isolation and preclinical evaluation; further fractionation, pharmacokinetics and in vivo toxicity/efficacy studies are suggested.
Full text 12,541 characters · extracted from preprint-html · click to expand
Antimicrobial Potential of Medicinal Plants extracts | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Antimicrobial Potential of Medicinal Plants extracts Vivaswaan Pandey, Sapana Kanyal This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-9297979/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background: The surge of antimicrobial resistance makes it necessary to look for new sources of drugs; medicinal plants still form a supplier of bioactive secondary metabolites for the future. Objectives: The goal of the study was to test the ethnic selected medicinal plants for in vitro activity against a specific group of human pathogens, assess the strength (MIC/MBC), analyse the phytochemistry, examine mechanisms of action and interactions, conduct preliminary toxicity testing on mammalian cells to prioritize the leads for further development. Methods: The polarity series (hexane, ethyl acetate, 70% ethanol, aqueous; hydrodistillation for essential oils) was used to extract eight taxa, which were then subjected to agar diffusion and CLSI-guided broth microdilution (resazurin confirmation) screening. Phytochemical characterization included qualitative tests, total phenolic/flavonoid quantification (TPC/TFC), TLC, HPLC–DAD, and GC–MS. Mechanistic assays included membrane integrity, antibiofilm and quorum-sensing inhibition, time–kill kinetics, and checkerboard synergy with ciprofloxacin. Cytotoxicity (HepG2) determined CC₅₀ and selectivity indices (SI = CC₅₀/MIC). Results: Aromatic, phenolic-molecule-rich extracts—Thymus vulgaris and Origanum vulgare—proved to be the strongest and most reliable antimicrobial agents (zones over 25 mm; MIC₅₀≈31.25 µg/mL; geometric mean MICs≈45–50 µg/mL), they were active in a way that disrupted membranes (leakage of ~68–72% at 1× MIC), Diminution of antibacterial biofilm activity was substantial (~73–78% at 100 µg/mL), rapid bactericidal kinetics (≥3 log₁₀ reduction at 24 h) and synergistic interactions with ciprofloxacin (FICI ≈ 0.42–0.45). Terminalia chebula was the next to be tested with moderate potency (MIC₅₀≈62.5 µg/mL). Very strong positive relationship was noticed between TPC and the antimicrobial power (r≈+0.74 vs zone; r≈−0.71 vs MIC, p<0.01). In safety profiling, the winning ones were Thymus and Origanum (HepG2 CC₅₀≈1,400–1,500 µg/mL; SI≈28–33). Conclusion: Ethnobotanical selection along with standardized assays pointed out Thymus and Origanum as high-priority leads for bioassay-guided isolation and preclinical evaluation; further fractionation, pharmacokinetics and in vivo toxicity/efficacy studies are suggested. Biochemical Research Methods medicinal plants antimicrobial activity phenolic compounds MIC bioassay-guided fractionation Full Text Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-9297979","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":616302034,"identity":"1b4e4319-ea8a-4b9d-8b89-0e582827fc57","order_by":0,"name":"Vivaswaan Pandey","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Lucknow","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Vivaswaan","middleName":"","lastName":"Pandey","suffix":""},{"id":616302035,"identity":"063eb0c2-0b2b-4841-8e38-5b70834cded4","order_by":1,"name":"Sapana Kanyal","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Lucknow","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Sapana","middleName":"","lastName":"Kanyal","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-04-02 04:34:25","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":false,"vertebrateSubjects":true,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false,"humanSubjectConsent":false,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":true},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9297979/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9297979/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":106094936,"identity":"14600543-5059-4446-bfc1-409e834ed794","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-03 11:43:41","extension":"pdf","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1222440,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"AntimicrobialpotentialofmedicinalplantsextractsVPSK.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9297979/v1_covered_074a6f90-7ff1-4c93-b4e7-f22244643eee.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003eAntimicrobial Potential of Medicinal Plants extracts\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":false,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":true,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":true,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"medicinal plants; antimicrobial activity; phenolic compounds; MIC; bioassay-guided fractionation","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9297979/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9297979/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBackground: \u003c/strong\u003eThe surge of antimicrobial resistance makes it necessary to look for new sources of drugs; medicinal plants still form a supplier of bioactive secondary metabolites for the future. Objectives: The goal of the study was to test the ethnic selected medicinal plants for in vitro activity against a specific group of human pathogens, assess the strength (MIC/MBC), analyse the phytochemistry, examine mechanisms of action and interactions, conduct preliminary toxicity testing on mammalian cells to prioritize the leads for further development.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMethods:\u003c/strong\u003e The polarity series (hexane, ethyl acetate, 70% ethanol, aqueous; hydrodistillation for essential oils) was used to extract eight taxa, which were then subjected to agar diffusion and CLSI-guided broth microdilution (resazurin confirmation) screening. Phytochemical characterization included qualitative tests, total phenolic/flavonoid quantification (TPC/TFC), TLC, HPLC–DAD, and GC–MS. Mechanistic assays included membrane integrity, antibiofilm and quorum-sensing inhibition, time–kill kinetics, and checkerboard synergy with ciprofloxacin. Cytotoxicity (HepG2) determined CC₅₀ and selectivity indices (SI = CC₅₀/MIC).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResults:\u003c/strong\u003e Aromatic, phenolic-molecule-rich extracts—Thymus vulgaris and Origanum vulgare—proved to be the strongest and most reliable antimicrobial agents (zones over 25 mm; MIC₅₀≈31.25 µg/mL; geometric mean MICs≈45–50 µg/mL), they were active in a way that disrupted membranes (leakage of ~68–72% at 1× MIC), Diminution of antibacterial biofilm activity was substantial (~73–78% at 100 µg/mL), rapid bactericidal kinetics (≥3 log₁₀ reduction at 24 h) and synergistic interactions with ciprofloxacin (FICI ≈ 0.42–0.45). Terminalia chebula was the next to be tested with moderate potency (MIC₅₀≈62.5 µg/mL). Very strong positive relationship was noticed between TPC and the antimicrobial power (r≈+0.74 vs zone; r≈−0.71 vs MIC, p\u0026lt;0.01). In safety profiling, the winning ones were Thymus and Origanum (HepG2 CC₅₀≈1,400–1,500 µg/mL; SI≈28–33).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConclusion:\u003c/strong\u003e Ethnobotanical selection along with standardized assays pointed out Thymus and Origanum as high-priority leads for bioassay-guided isolation and preclinical evaluation; further fractionation, pharmacokinetics and in vivo toxicity/efficacy studies are suggested.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Antimicrobial Potential of Medicinal Plants extracts","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-04-03 02:18:16","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9297979/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"1d2c6988-42c0-44ae-bf42-662036a0da60","owner":[],"postedDate":"April 3rd, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":65581592,"name":"Biochemical Research Methods"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-04-03T02:18:16+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-04-03 02:18:16","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-9297979","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-9297979","identity":"rs-9297979","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: preprint-html

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2026) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-05-24T02:00:01.246996+00:00
License: CC-BY-4.0