Claim · model-written summary
Dried leaf extract showed higher antimicrobial inhibition than frozen extract against the tested bacteria.
- Taxon
- figt0
- Treatment
- DL extracte0
- Outcome
- inhibitory activitye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- ≥ 12 mme0
- Comparator
- FL extracte0
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingQualifier
Verbatim
e0“higher inhibitory activity (inhibition zones ≥ 12 mm) of DL extract against Bacillus subtilis, Bacillus amyloliquefaciens, Bacillus cereus, Enterococcus faecalis, Micrococcus luteus, Salmonella enteritidis, Escherichia coli, Proteus vulgaris, Proteus mirabilis, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, while FL extract was less active”
t0“fig leaves”
Title
Yulian Tumbarski; Teodora Yaneva; Albena Parzhanova; et al. Springer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology) 2026. doi:10.1051/bioconf/202623601021/pdf
Other claims from this paper (7)
- Intervention effect Dried fig leaves had 17.06% protein versus 4.14% in frozen leaves.
- Intervention effect Dried fig leaves had 11.4% carbohydrate versus 5.93% in frozen leaves.
- Intervention effect Dried leaf extract had 24.53 mg GAE/g dw total polyphenols versus 1.80 in frozen extract.
- Intervention effect Dried leaf extract had 0.83 mg QE/g dw flavonoids versus 0.07 in frozen extract.
- Intervention effect Dried leaves had greater DPPH antioxidant activity, 183.81 versus 8.38.
- Intervention effect Dried leaves had greater FRAP antioxidant activity, 193.60 versus 13.81 mM TE/g dw.
- Recommendation The authors recommend drying to preserve fig leaf bioactivity.