Claim · model-written summary
None of the extracts of both medicinal plants inhibited B. albus.
- Taxon
- both medicinal plantse4
- Interactor
- B. albusBacillus albuse4other
- Outcome
- no inhibition of B. albuse4
Verbatim
e4“There was no inhibition of B. albus from all extracts of both medicinal plants”
Title
Maeryll Krisna A. Abastillas; Thessa Joy R. Bagolcol; Pamela B. Buro; et al. International Journal of Biosciences (IJB) 2023. doi:10.12692/ijb/22.2.171-182
Other claims from this paper (6)
- Observation Phytochemical analysis of B. vulgaris indicated the presence of alkaloids, carbohydrates and glycosides.
- Observation Phytochemical analysis of Alpinia sp. indicated the presence of alkaloids, carbohydrates and glycosides.
- Observation Phytochemical analysis of B. vulgaris indicated the presence of phytosterols, flavonoids, and phenols and tannins.
- Observation Phytochemical analysis of Alpinia sp. indicated the presence of phytosterols, flavonoids, and phenols and tannins.
- Observation All extracts of the two medicinal plants inhibited the growth of A. hydrophila at 0.5 g ml -1.
- Observation The MBC and MIC of B. vulgaris aqueous extract and Alpinia sp. ethanolic extract against V. harveyi showed inhibition at 0.5 g ml -1, except the MIC of B. vulgaris aqueous extract at 0.25 g ml -1.