Abstract
ABSTRACT Water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) is an oceanic macrophyte and one of the worst sea-going weeds in the world and Egypt. The grouping of substantial metals in water hyacinth was higher in roots than in shoots. Nutrient content e.g. ammonia, nitrate, nitrite and phosphate was higher in the shoots of water hyacinth. Water hyacinth is a wellspring of phytochemicals which have a medicinal function. In this study, the high degree of peroxidation and nonenzymatic antioxidant systems were detected in leaf extracts. The chemical analysis of the leaf extracts was performed using acetone, ethanol, methanol and n-Butyl alcohol. The fractionated extracts showed the presence of some medicine compounds that include phenols, protein, alkaloids, amino acids, carbohydrate, flavonoids, glycosides, tannins, and terpenoids. The fractionated extracts were screened for antimicrobial and antifungal activities. The leaf extracts of E. crassipes exhibited antimicrobial activities against some bacteria: Escherichia coli, Bacillus subtilis, Bacillus cereus, Lactobacillus casei and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and antifungal activity against six pathogenic fungi i.e. Aspergillus flavus, A. niger, Alternaria alternata, Colletotrichum gloeosporioides, Candida albicans, and Fusarium solani by using the well diffusion method. Streptomycin and Fluconazole were used as a standard as antimicrobial and antifungal agents, respectively. B. subtilis, F. solani, C. gloeosporioides and A. alternata were the most susceptible to plant extracts. The most effective antifungal and antimicrobial agent against some plant pathogens was the n-Butyl alcohol extract. Also, it reduced the production of mycotoxin e.g. Aflatoxin B1 and Ochratoxin A. The application of the formulation of the plant extract of E. crassipes protected wheat plants against net blotch diseases. The results indicated that the leaf extractsof E. crassipes have potential as biofungicides and can be used in the industry.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 14
Claim · model-written summary
Water hyacinth roots had more substantial metals than shoots.
- Taxon
- water hyacinth
Pontederia crassipese0 - Organ / stage
- rootse0
- Outcome
- grouping of substantial metalse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- shootse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The grouping of substantial metals in water hyacinth was higher in roots than in shoots.”
Claim · model-written summary
Water hyacinth shoots had higher ammonia, nitrate and nitrite content.
- Taxon
- water hyacinthPontederia crassipese0
- Organ / stage
- shootse0
- Outcome
- ammonia, nitrate, nitritee0
- Direction
- highere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Nutrient content e.g. ammonia, nitrate, nitrite and phosphate was higher in the shoots of water hyacinth.”
Claim · model-written summary
Water hyacinth shoots had higher phosphate content.
- Taxon
- water hyacinthPontederia crassipese0
- Organ / stage
- shootse0
- Outcome
- phosphatee0
- Direction
- highere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Nutrient content e.g. ammonia, nitrate, nitrite and phosphate was higher in the shoots of water hyacinth.”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf extracts had high peroxidation and nonenzymatic antioxidant systems.
Verbatim
e0“the high degree of peroxidation and nonenzymatic antioxidant systems were detected in leaf extracts.”
t0“Eichhornia crassipes”
Claim · model-written summary
Fractionated extracts contained phenols, protein and alkaloids.
Verbatim
e0“The fractionated extracts showed the presence of some medicine compounds that include phenols, protein, alkaloids, amino acids, carbohydrate, flavonoids, glycosides, tannins, and terpenoids.”
t0“Eichhornia crassipes”
Claim · model-written summary
Fractionated extracts contained amino acids, carbohydrate and flavonoids.
Verbatim
e0“The fractionated extracts showed the presence of some medicine compounds that include phenols, protein, alkaloids, amino acids, carbohydrate, flavonoids, glycosides, tannins, and terpenoids.”
t0“Eichhornia crassipes”
Claim · model-written summary
Fractionated extracts contained glycosides, tannins and terpenoids.
Verbatim
e0“The fractionated extracts showed the presence of some medicine compounds that include phenols, protein, alkaloids, amino acids, carbohydrate, flavonoids, glycosides, tannins, and terpenoids.”
t0“Eichhornia crassipes”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf extracts inhibited bacteria including Escherichia coli and Bacillus species.
- Taxon
- E. crassipese0
- Organ / stage
- leafe0
- Interactor
- Escherichia coli
.jpg?width=60)
Escherichia colie0other - Outcome
- antimicrobial activitiese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“The leaf extracts of E. crassipes exhibited antimicrobial activities against some bacteria: Escherichia coli, Bacillus subtilis, Bacillus cereus, Lactobacillus casei and Pseudomonas aeruginosa”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf extracts inhibited six named fungi.
- Taxon
- Eichhornia crassipest0
- Interactor
- Aspergillus flavus
Aspergillus flavuse0pathogen - Outcome
- antifungal activitye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“antifungal activity against six pathogenic fungi i.e. Aspergillus flavus, A. niger, Alternaria alternata, Colletotrichum gloeosporioides, Candida albicans, and Fusarium solani”
t0“Eichhornia crassipes”
Claim · model-written summary
B. subtilis, F. solani, C. gloeosporioides and A. alternata were the most susceptible to extracts.
- Taxon
- Eichhornia crassipest0
- Interactor
- B. subtilis
Bacillus subtilise0other - Outcome
- most susceptible to plant extractse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“B. subtilis, F. solani, C. gloeosporioides and A. alternata were the most susceptible to plant extracts.”
t0“Eichhornia crassipes”
Claim · model-written summary
The n-Butyl alcohol extract was the most effective antimicrobial and antifungal agent.
Verbatim
e0“The most effective antifungal and antimicrobial agent against some plant pathogens was the n-Butyl alcohol extract.”
t0“Eichhornia crassipes”
Claim · model-written summary
The extract reduced mycotoxin production.
- Taxon
- Eichhornia crassipest0
- Outcome
- production of mycotoxin e.g. Aflatoxin B1 and Ochratoxin Ae0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Verbatim
e0“Also, it reduced the production of mycotoxin e.g. Aflatoxin B1 and Ochratoxin A.”
t0“Eichhornia crassipes”
Claim · model-written summary
Eichhornia extract protected wheat plants from net blotch.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Treatment
- application of the formulation of the plant extract of E. crassipese0
- Outcome
- net blotch diseasese0
- Direction
- protectede0
Not reportedInteractorComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The application of the formulation of the plant extract of E. crassipes protected wheat plants against net blotch diseases.”
Claim · model-written summary
Authors propose E. crassipes leaf extracts as biofungicides.
Verbatim
e0“the leaf extractsof E. crassipes have potential as biofungicides and can be used in the industry.”
The same questions in other papers
botanical · disease · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
55 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
69 papers more in this group
See all 73 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.