Int J Pharm Pharm Sci, Vol 7, Issue 3, 186-190Original Article


ANTIFUNGAL SCREENING OF 61 TRADITIONAL MEDICINAL PLANTS OF 305 EXTRACTS AGAINST DERMATOPHYTIC FUNGI TRICHOPHYTON TONSURANS

P. SHIVAKUMAR SINGH, G. M. VIDYASAGAR

Medicinal Plants and Microbiology Research Laboratory Department of Post Graduate Studies and Research in Botany Gulbarga University, Gulbarga 585106, Karnataka, India.
Email: gmvidyasagar@rediffmail.com

Received: 02 Dec 2014 Revised and Accepted: 22 Dec 2014

ABSTRACT

Objective: Antidermatophytic activity of 305 extracts from 61 traditional medicinal plants belonging to 33 different families from Hyderabad Karnataka region was subjected to screening against Trichophyton tonsurans.

Methods: The screening was performed using Pet ether, chloroform, ethyalacetate, methanol and aqueous successive extracts (Soxhlet extractor) of each plant was tested for their antifungal activity using the agar well diffusion method at a sample concentration of 5 & 2.5 mg/ml. The minimum inhibitory concentrations of 10 very effective plants were determined using the broth dilution technique.

Results: Out of 61 plants, 10 exhibited very effective antidermatophytic activity in three extracts like ethyalacetate (05), methanol (02), chloroform (02), Aqueous (01) extracts, effective activity observed in 14 plants in different extracts, whereas 34 plants showed moderate activity, 03 plants showed weak activity.

Conclusion: On the basis of the results obtained, we conclude that the crude extracts of Allium sativam L., Corchorus oleterius L., Gymnosporia montana (Roth) Benth, Milletia pinnata (L.) Panigrahi, Lycopersicon esculentum L., Annona squamosa L., Plumbago zeylanica L., Calotropis gigantea L., Zingiber officinale Rosce. exhibited significant antidermatophytic activity (T. tonsurans) and properties that support folkloric use in the treatment of skin diseases as broad-spectrum antimycotic agents. This probably explains the use of these plants by the indigenous people against dermatological infections.

Keywords: 61 medicinal plants, Trichophyton tonsurans, Antifungal screening.

INTRODUCTION

Plants have a long history of antibiotic usage for the cure of disease caused by antimicrobial, including antiviral, antibacterial and antifungal, agents. Natural products are generally harmless or have minimum side effects as compared to synthetic drugs [1]. There are various types of fungal pathogens that infect humans, animals and plants, some causes severe type of acute inflammation and infection of hair, nails and skin. Such as Trichophyton longifusis, Trichophyton tonsurans, Microsporum audouinii, Trichophyton schoenlenii some organisms cause chronic infection of lungs, ear, and bones, etc., such as Candida albicans, some causes infection of joint, skin, and central nervous system, such as Aspergillus flavus, while Microsporum Canis causes ring worm infection of skin and hair in dogs and cats. Keeping in view, there is a need for investigation of new antifungal compounds [2]. Dermatophytes are the major cause of superficial mycosis of man and remain a public health problem, especially in tropical and subtropical countries. The humid weather, over population and poor hygienic conditions are conducive to the growth of dermatophytes. Even though it responds to treatment with conventional antifungal, the disease has a tendency to recur at the same or at different sites. In recent years, there has been growing interest in the use of medicinal plants. A medicinal plant is any plant used in order to relieve, prevent or cure a disease or to alter physiological and pathological process, or any plant employed as a source of drugs or their precursors [3-7]. Antifungal activities of medicinal plants have been reported by various researchers throughout the world [8-16]. In an effort to discover new lead compounds, scientists from different areas are investigating new plants aiming the detection of secondary metabolites with a relevant antimicrobial usefulness that can be further synthesized for improving their activity [17-20].

This is first and novel report from Hyderabad Karnataka region providing ethnopharmacological validation with special reference to T. tonsurans.

Therefore, in this report, the antimycotic activity of petroleum ether, chloroform, ethyalacetate, methanol and aqueous extracts of 61 medicinal plant parts against common dermatophytic fungi T. tonsurans was recorded.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Plant materials

Plant materials were collected from various localities of Hyderabad Karnataka region and Identified with the help of Gulbarga district flora [21] the voucher specimens deposited in the herbarium centre, Department of Botany, Gulbarga University, Karnataka, India. The collected plant materials were initially rinsed with distilled water to remove soil and other contaminants and dried on paper towel in laboratory at 37 ± 2°C for week.

Preparation of the plant extracts

The selected plant materials after shade drying were ground in a grinding machine in the laboratory. 25g of shade dried powder was weighed and extracted successively with petroleum ether, chloroform, ethyl acetate, methanol and aqueous in soxhlet extractor for 48h. The extracts were concentrated under reduced pressure and preserved in refrigerator in airtight bottles for further use.

Microbial culture and growth conditions

Test microorganism Microsporum gypseum used in the present study was obtained from M. R. medical college, Gulbarga, Karnataka, India. The Culture of T. tonsurans grown on Sabouraud dextrose broth (HiMedia) at 28°C for 48 h and it was maintained on agar slants at 4°C.

Inoculum preparation

Stock inoculums suspensions of T. tonsurans strain was prepared from 10-day culture in PDA at 28°C to induce sporulation. Fungal colonies were covered with 5 mL of sterile saline solution (NaCl 0.85 % w/v), the surface gently scraped with a sterile loop and this resultant mixture of fungal units was transferred to a sterile tube. The turbidity of the final inoculum was standardized according to McFarland scale 0.5 tube and adjusted for presenting the fungal population of 106 colony former units (CFU). The confirmation of the inoculum quantification was made by plating 0.01 ml of inoculum suspension in Sabouraud dextrose agar (SDA). The plates were incubated at 28°C and were examined daily for the presence of fungal colonies which were counted as soon as growth became visible [22, 23].

Agar-well diffusion method [24]

The assay was conducted by agar well diffusion method. About 15 to 20 ml of potato dextrose agar medium was poured in the sterilized petri dishes and allowed to solidify. Fungal lawn was prepared using 5 days old culture strains. The fungal strains were suspended in a saline solution (0.85% NaCl) and adjusted to a turbidity of 0.5 Mac Farland standards (108 CFU/ml). 1 ml of fungal strain was spread over the medium using a sterilized glass spreader. Using flamed sterile borer, wells of 4 mm diameter were punctured in the culture medium and required concentrations of serially diluted extract (2.5, 5mg/ml) was added to the 20μl to each wells.

The plates thus prepared were left for diffusion of extracts into media for one hour in the refrigerator and then incubated at 30oC. After incubation for 48h, the plates were observed for the zone of inhibition. Diameter zone of inhibition was measured and expressed in millimeters. Dimethyl formamide (DMF) was used as a negative control. The experiments were conducted in triplicates.

Minimum inhibitory concentration [25]

One ml of sterile liquid Sabouraud medium was added to 08 sterile capped tubes, 1 ml of each solvent extracts suspension was added to tube 1. The contents were mixed and 1 ml was transferred to tube 2. This serial dilution was repeated through to tube six and 1 ml was discarded from tube 6. Fifty μl of inoculum was added to tubes 1-8 and the contents were mixed. Medium control (no inoculum and no drug) and inoculum control (no drug) tubes were prepared.

The final concentrations of each plant solvent extracts ranged from 05 mg/ml to 0.15 mg/ml. The tubes were incubated at 30oC for 96 h. The fungal growth in each tube was evaluated visually depending up on the turbidity in the tubes. MIC was defined as the drug concentration at which the turbidity of the medium was the same as the medium control.

Statistical analysis

All the experiments were conducted in triplicate unless stated otherwise and statistical analysis of the data was performed by analysis of variance (ANOVA), using STATISTICA 5.5 (Stat Soft Inc, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA) software. A probability value of difference p ~ 0.05 was considered to denote a statistically significance All data were presented as mean values ± standard deviation (SD).

RESULTS

The plant extracts and their level of activity against the Trichophyton tonsurans was listed in table 1. A number of 305 extracts from 61 ethno medicinal plants belonging to 33 different families were used in treating skin diseases in Hyderabad Karnataka region were subjected to antidermatophytic screening against Trichophyton tonsurans in Pet ether, chloroform, ethyalacetate, methanol and aqueous extracts of each plant were tested for their antifungal activity using the agar well diffusion method at a sample concentration of 5 & 2.5 mg/ml.

Out of 61 plants, 10 exhibited very effective antidermatophytic activity in three solvent extracts Allium sativam L., Corchorus oleterius L., Gymnosporia montana (Roth) Benth, Milletia pinnata (L.) Panigrahi, Lycopersicon esculentum L., (Ethyl acetate), Annona squamosa L., Plumbago zeylanica L. (Methanolic), Calotropis gigantea L., Zingiber officinale Rosce. (Chloroform), Bergera koenigii L. (Aqueous) followed by effective activity was observed in 14 plants of different three solvent extracts, i. e., Achyranthes aspera L., Aegle marmelos (L.), Allium sativam L., Citrus medica L., Lawsonia inermis Linn., Senna auriculata (L.) Roxb., Tectona grandis L., Tinospora cordifolia (Willd.) J. Hook&Thoms, Thevetia nerrifolia Juss., Emblica officinalis Gaertn. (Ethyl acetate) Aloe vera L. Curcuma longa Linn. (Petroleum ether), Tridax procumbens Linn. Tephrosia purpurea (L.) Pers. (Chloroform). Whereas the moderate activity observed in 34 plants. While the weak activity observed in 03 plants, i. e., Carica papaya L., Coriandrum sativam L., Tamarindus indica Linn. There was no inhibition recorded from the negative control (DMSO), while the standard drug, Ketoconazole significantly inhibited (28. 66±1.15 to 12. 33±1.52 mm) the growth of the test dermatophyte.

Fig. 1: Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (mg/ml) of 10 effective medicinal plants of methanolic extracts against T. tonsurans

DISCUSSION

In the present report the effective activity observed in 10 plants in four solvent extracts at concentrations of between 05 and 2.5 mg/ml, present result is in line with the work of Shinkafi and Manga [26], who reported that the aqueous and solvent leaf extracts of Mitracarpus scaber and Pergularia tomentosa exhibited significant anti-fungal activities against dermatophytes at concentrations of between 80 and 160 mg/ml.

In the present report, the ethyl acetate extracts were shown effective activity when comparing with aqueous extract. Whereas in previous report showed effective activity in methanolic extracts, though not significant (P>0.05) when compared with the aqueous extract. The reason for this slight difference may be attributed to the solubility level of the phytoconstituents in the extracting solvents. It means that the organic solvent dissolved more of more of the active ingredients than aqueous. This reason is supported by Cowan [17], who reported that organic solvent were better extraction solvent over water.

Among 12 very effective plants, 5 from ethyl acetate extracts were detected. In the past similar report concentrated on solvents – compound relationship. the presence of bioactive metabolites presents in Azadirachta indica which are not soluble in hexane but are soluble in ethyalacetate so that the significantly suppressed the growth of the dermatophytes fungi, and two plants (Calotropis gigantean, Zingiber officinale) from chloroform extracts were reported. The similar type of report was given by Bharti and Vidyasagar [27], in Calotropis spp.

The methanolic and ethyalacetate solvent extracts were very effective and effective in respectively in the present study. The similar type of results reported by Mehmood Z et al., [28] methanolic extracts showed an inhibitory effect against the three Trichophyton spp. In the present study Bergera koenigii L. leaves showed very effective activity observed in aqueous extract. The leaves are extensively used as a flavouring agent in curries and chutneys. The past report of Dhar ML et al. on antifungals was not correlating [29].

In the present report the weak activity was observed in 03 plants i. e., Carica papaya L., Coriandrum sativam L. and Tamarindus indica Linn. Whereas in previous report the similar type of results of Carica papaya extracts against dermatophytes were observed[30].

Table 1: Antidermatophytic screening (T. tonsurans) of traditional plants drugs of Hyderabad Karnataka region.

S. No. Name of the
Plant

Pa-rt

us-ed

 Zone of Inhibition in different solvent extracts (mm) C S
P C E M A
1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 DMSO Ketoconazole
01 Achyranthes aspera L. L 07.33±1.52 05.00±0.00 07. 33±1.52 07.66±0.57 11.66±1.15 05.00±1.00 05.00±1.00 04.33±1.52 04.00±0.00 NA NA 30. 33±1.52
02 Aegle marmelos (L.) L 07.00±0.00 04.00±1.00 06. 33±1.52 04.33±1.52 10.33±1.52 05.33±1.52 05.33±1.52 NA 06.33±1.52 NA NA 18. 33±1.52
03 Allium cepa Linn. B 0533±1.52 06.00±0.00 07.00±1.00 05.00±0.00 29.00±0.00 06.33±1.52 08.00±0.00 05.00±0.00 09.00±0.00 07.00±0.00 NA 15. 66±1.15
04 Allium sativam L. B 07.66±1.15 05.00±0.00 07.66±1.15 07.66±0.57 11.66±1.15 05.00±0.00 05.33±0.57 04.66±0.57 NA NA NA 30. 33±1.52
05 Aloe vera L. L 15.00±0.00 06.00±1.00 07.33±1.52 06.00±0.00 09.33±0.57 06.00±0.00 07.33±0.57 07.00±0.00 06.33±1.52 05.00±0.00 NA 24.00±0.00
06 Amaranthus spinosus L. L 05.66±1.57 04.66±0.57 06.33±0.57 05.00±0.00 07.33±0.57 05.33±1.52 08.66±1.52 05.00±0.00 05.33±1.15 NA NA 24. 33±1.52
07 Annona reticulata L. L 05.00±000 04.33±1.52 06.00±0.00 04.33±1.15 07.66±0.57 05.00±0.00 07.00±0.00 04.66±1.57 06.33±1.52 05.00±1.00 NA 26. 66±0.57
08 Annona squamosa L. L 09.33±0.57 05.33±1.52 07.00±0.00 05.00±1.00 07.66±0.57 05. 66±1.57 15. 33±0.57 08.00±0.00 07.66±1.52 NA NA 27.00±0.00
09 Argemone mexicana L. L 05.00±0.00 NA 04.00±0.00 NA 06.00±0.00 NA 05.66±0.57 NA 05.33±0.57 NA NA 28. 33±1.52
10 Azadirachta indica A. Juss. L 04.33±0.57 04.33±0.57 05.33±0.57 04.00±1.00 06.66±1.57 06.33±1.52 05.66±1.57 08.00±1.00 06.66±1.57 05.00±0.00 NA 35. 66±1.15
11 Bergera koenigii L. L 05.33±1.52 04.66±1.52 06.33±0.57 05.00±0.00 07.66±1.52 05.33±0.57 06.33±1.52 04.00±0.00 13.00±0.00 07.00±0.00 NA 34. 33±1.52
12 Butea monosperma (Lam.) Taub. L 07.66±1.52 NA 08.33±1.52 05.66±1.52 08.33±0.57 05.66±1.52 09.66±1.52 09.33±0.57 05.66±1.52 NA NA 34.00±0.00
13 Cajanus cajan (L.)Mill. L 07.66±0.57 06.66±1.57 08.66±0.57 06.66±0.57 07.66±1.57 06.66±0.57 06.66±0.57 05.66±1.57 05.66±0.57 NA NA 27. 33±1.52
14 Calotropis gigantea L. L 05.33±0.57 08.66±1.57 12.66±1.57 09.33±0.57 10.33±0.57 06.66±0.57 07.66±1.57 05.00±1.00 05.00±1.00 NA NA 32.00±0.00
15 Carica papaya L. L 05.33±0.57 05.66±1.52 04.33±1.15 04.66±1.52 07.33±1.15 05.66±1.52 06.66±1.52 05.33±0.57 05.33±0.57 NA NA 24. 33±1.52
16 Ceasalpinia bonducella (L.) Flem. S 09.00±0.00 07.66±1.57 08.33±0.57 08.00±0.00 08.66±1.57 07.00±0.00 07.33±1.15 05.66±1.57 05.33±0.57 NA NA 31.50±0.00
17 Celosia argentea L. S 05.33±0.57 NA 06. 00±0.00 05.33±1.15 06.00±0.00 05.66±0.57 06.33±1.52 05.33±1.15 05.66±0.57 NA NA 24. 66±0.57
18 Citrus medica L. L 08. 00±0.00 05. 33±0.57 10.00±0.00 08. 66±1.52 11.66±0.57 06.00±0.00 10. 33±0.57 07. 66±1.52 04.33±1.15 NA NA 15.00±0.00
19 Coccinia indica Wt. & Arn. L NA NA 08.00±0.00 06.33±1.15 08.00±0.00 05.00±0.00 08.33±0.57 06.33±0.57 17.33±1.15 NA NA 26. 66±1.15
20 Corchorus oleterius L. S 06. 01±0.00 05. 33±1.15 08. 00±0.00 05. 66±1.52 12.66±0.57 05. 66±1.52 07. 33±1.15 05. 33±0.57 10.66±0.57 NA NA 23. 33±1.52
21 Coriandrum sativam L. A 05. 00±0.00 04. 33±1.15 06±33±1.15 04. 66±1.52 07. 33±1.15 05. 66±1.52 05. 33±1.15 05. 00±0.00 05. 01±0.00 NA NA 28.00±1.00
22 Cryptolepis buchananii Roem&Schult. A 05. 33±1.15 05. 33±0.57 08. 00±0.00 06. 33±1.15 07. 33±1.15 06. 33±1.15 07. 33±1.15 07. 66±1.52 05. 33±1.15 NA NA 31.00±0.00
23 Curcuma longa Linn. R 11. 00±0.00 08. 33±1.15 06. 66±1.52 06. 00±0.00 06. 66±1.52 06. 33±0.57 08. 00±0.00 04. 33±1.15 05. 66±1.52 NA NA 30. 33±1.52
24 Dalbergia sisso Roxb. L 06. 33±1.52 06. 66±1.57 08. 66±0.57 06. 33±1.52 08. 66±1.57 05. 66±1.52 07. 33±1.52 06. 33±1.52 05. 66±0.57 NA NA 28.00±0.00
25 Datura metel L. L 06. 00±0.00 05. 33±1.52 07. 00±0.00 04. 66±1.57 08. 66±0.57 05. 66±1.52 08. 66±0.57 05. 33±1.52 NA NA NA 26.00±0.00
26 Emblica officinalis Gaertn. L 04. 33±1.52 06. 66±0.57 08. 66±1.57 06. 33±1.52 11. 00±0.00 06. 66±1.52 09. 66±0.57 07. 00±1.00 NA NA NA 28. 66±1.15
27 Euphorbia tirucalli L. L 04. 33±1.52 04. 00±1.00 08. 00±0.00 07. 33±1.52 05. 66±0.57 04. 33±1.52 09. 00±1.00 07. 00±0.00 05. 66±0.57 NA NA 26.00±0.00
28 Ficus racemosa L L 05. 33±1.52 05. 66±1.52 06. 66±1.52 06. 00±0.00 07. 00±1.00 05. 66±0.57 05. 33±1.15 05. 33±1.15 05. 66±0.57 NA NA 40.00±0.00
29 Gymnosporia montana (Roth)Benth L 05. 00±0.00 06. 66±1.52 08. 33±1.52 06. 66±1.52 12. 66±0.57 08. 66±1.57 08. 33±1.15 09. 66±0.57 05. 00±1.00 NA NA 30. 33±1.52
30 Hibiscus rosa-sinensis L. F 05. 00±1.00 07. 66±0.57 08. 00±1.00 06. 33±1.15 05. 33±1.52 04. 66±0.57 07. 33±1.15 04. 66±0.57 05. 33±1.15 NA NA 30. 66±1.15
31 Hyptis suoveolens (L.)Poit. L 06. 33±1.15 05. 33±0.57 10. 33±1.52 06. 66±0.57 10. 66±1.57 08. 33±1.52 09. 33±0.57 08. 00±0.00 05. 00±0.00 NA NA 26. 33±1.52
32 Ixora coccinea L F 06. 33±0.57 04. 66±1.57 06. 33±1.52 05. 66±1.52 08. 66±1.57 04. 33±1.15 07. 00±0.00 04. 33±0.57 05. 33±1.15 NA NA 28. 33±1.52
33 Jatropha glandulifera Roxb. L 06. 33±1.15 04. 00±0.00 06. 66±0.57 05. 33±1.15 11. 33±1.15 05. 33±0.57 09. 33±0.57 06. 33±1.15 06. 00±0.00 NA NA 28.00±1.00
34 Lantana camara L. L 05. 33±0.57 0433±1.15 NA 10. 66±1.52 05. 33±1.52 04. 66±1.52 04. 33±0.57 10. 33±0.57 NA NA NA 16. 33±1.52
35 Lawsonia inermis Linn. L 05. 33±1.15 04. 33±0.57 06. 66±0.57 06. 66±1.52 11. 00±1.00 04. 00±0.00 09. 66±1.52 06. 66±1.57 06. 00±0.00 NA NA 38.00±0.00
36 Lycopersicon esculentum L. L 07. 33±1.15 NA 07.66±0.57 04. 66±1.52 12. 66±0.57 05. 00±0.00 07. 00±0.00 05. 66±0.57 09. 66±1.52 05.33±1.15 NA 23.00±0.00
37 Mangifera indica Linn. L NA 06. 00±0.00 06. 66±0.57 07. 66±1.52 06. 66±1.52 05. 33±1.15 09. 66±1.52 07. 33±1.52 05. 66±1.52 NA NA 32. 66±1.15
38 Mentha viridis L. A 06. 00±1.00 NA NA NA 04. 00±1.00 NA 05. 00±1.00 NA 06. 00±1.00 NA NA 28. 33±1.52
39

Milletia pinnata (L.)

Panigrahi

 L 11. 33±1.52 08. 66±1.57 11. 66±1.57 11. 33±1.15 12. 33±1.52 06. 33±1.15 11. 33±0.57 06. 66±0.57 NA NA NA 16. 66±1.15
40 Momordica charantia L. L 06. 00±1.00 05. 33±0.57 07. 66±1.52 05. 00±1.00 08. 66±0.57 07. 66±1.57 08. 00±1.00 07. 66±1.57 06. 00±1.00 NA NA 28.00±0.00
41 Nerium odorum Solander. L 04. 66±0.57 04. 00±1.00 05. 66±1.52 04. 66±1.57 07. 33±1.52 05. 33±1.15 06. 00±1.00 05. 66±0.57 04. 00±1.00 NA NA 29. 33±1.5
42 Ocimum sanctum L. A 08. 33±0.57 05. 66±1.52 10. 00±1.00 NA 06. 66±0.57 05. 00±1.00 06. 66±1.52 04. 66±1.57 05. 33±0.57 NA NA 29. 66±1.15
43 Piper nigrum L. S 06. 66±1.57 05. 66±1.57 08. 66±1.52 06. 66±0.57 07. 33±1.15 06. 66±1.52 07. 33±1.15 05. 00±1.00 05. 33±1.15 NA NA 31.00±0.00
44 Plumbago zeylanica L. L 10. 00±1.00 04. 33±1.15 08. 33±0.57 04. 00±1.00 07. 66±1.52 05. 66±1.57 13. 00±1.00 04. 00±1.00 06. 66±1.52 NA NA 28.33±1.52
45 Ricinus communis L. S 04. 33±1.52 04. 66±1.52 05. 33±1.52 04. 66±0.57 07. 33±1.52 05. 66±0.57 08. 66±1.52 05. 66±1.57 04. 33±1.15 NA NA 29. 66±0.57
46 Santalum album L. L 06. 66±0.57 05. 66±1.57 06. 66±1.57 05. 00±0.00 07. 66±1.57 04. 66±0.57 10. 66±1.57 11. 66±1.52 04. 33±1.15 NA NA 38.20±1.00
47

Senna auriculata (L.)

Roxb.

 F 05. 33±1.15 05. 33±0.57 06. 00±0.00 05. 66±1.52 10. 66±0.57 05. 00±0.00 06. 33±1.52 04. 33±1.15 05. 66±1.57 NA NA 35. 33±1.52
48 Senna tora L. L 06. 33±1.52 05. 66±0.57 07. 33±0.57 05. 33±1.15 09. 33±1.52 06. 33±0.57 09. 33±0.57 06. 33±1.15 05. 66±1.57 NA NA 27. 33±1.52
49 Solanum nigrum L. L 06. 33±1.15 06. 33±0.57 09. 33±1.52 05. 66±0.57 06. 33±0.57 06. 66±1.52 06. 66±1.57 05. 33±1.52 08. 66±0.57 05.66±1.57 NA 29.00±0.00
50 Sterculia foetida L. S 09. 66±0.57 05. 66±1.57 07. 66±0.57 07. 33±0.57 07. 66±1.52 06. 00±0.00 08. 66±1.52 07. 66±1.52 06. 33±1.52 NA NA 27. 66±1.15
51 Semecarpus anacardium L. B 08. 00±0.00 05. 33±1.15 09. 66±0.57 05. 33±1.52 06. 00±0.00 05. 66±0.57 08. 33±1.15 05. 66±1.52 05. 66±1.57 NA NA 26. 33±1.52
52 Tamarindus indica Linn. L NA NA NA NA 05. 66±0.57 NA 06. 66±0.57 04. 66±1.57 NA NA NA 18. 66±1.15
53 Tectona grandis L. L 06. 33±1.52 04. 00±0.00 08. 33±0.57 05. 33±0.57 10. 66±0.57 05. 33±0.57 07. 33±1.52 05. 33±0.57 05. 00±0.00 NA NA 28. 33±1.52
54 Tinospora cordifolia (Willd.)J. Hook&Thoms. L 05. 66±0.57 05. 33±0.57 10. 66±0.57 06. 66±1.57 11. 66±0.57 06. 33±1.52 06. 33±1.15 07. 33±1.15 06. 66±0.57 NA NA 24. 66±1.15
55 Tephrosia purpurea (L.) Pers. L 06. 00±0.00 05. 00±0.00 11. 66±1.57 06. 33±1.15 10. 00±0.00 07. 33±0.57 09.33±0.57 06. 33±1.52 0500±0.00 NA NA 29.00±0.00
56 Thevetia nerrifolia Juss. L 05. 66±0.57 04. 33±0.57 06. 33±1.52 05. 33±0.57 10. 66±0.57 04. 66±1.57 08. 00±0.00 05. 33±0.57 05. 66±0.57 NA NA 28.00±0.00
57 Tribulus terrestris L. A 05. 33±1.52 04. 00±0.00 07. 66±0.57 04. 33±0.57 09. 33±1.52 04. 33±0.57 07. 33±1.52 04. 00±0.00 05. 33±0.57 NA NA 23. 66±0.57
58 Tridax procumbens Linn. A 06. 66±1.57 09. 66±0.57 10. 66±1.57 04. 33±1.52 05. 33±1.52 10. 33±1.52 04. 66±0.57 11. 33±1.52 NA NA NA 20. 66±1.15
59 Vitex negundo L. L 05. 66±0.57 05. 66±1.52 06. 66±1.57 06. 66±0.57 07. 33±1.15 05. 66±0.57 05. 33±1.52 05. 33±1.15 05. 00±1.00 NA NA 40. 66±1.15
60 Zingiber officinale Rosce. R 07. 66±1.57 04. 66±0.57 15. 33±1.15 06. 66±1.57 12. 33±1.15 05. 00±0.00 06. 66±1.52 07. 33±0.57 05. 66±0.57 NA NA 24. 66±1.15
61 Zizyphus jujuba Lam. B 07.66±1.57 06.00±0.00 05. 33±1.52 05.66±1.57 NA 06. 33±1.15 10.33±1.52 05. 00±1.00 NA NA NA 20. 66±1.15

1=5mg/ml,2=2.5mg/ml, P= Pet ether extract, C= Chloroform extract, E= Ethyl acetate extract, M=Methanol extract, A=Aqueous extract, C=Control (DMSO), S=Standard (Ketoconazole), NA= No Activity, Parts used= L. Leaf, R. Rhizome, A. Ariel, F. Flower, B. Bark, S. Seed. The minimum inhibitory concentrations of very effective 10 plants were determined, among the 10 plants extracts 03 i. e., Allium cepa Linn., Gymnosporia montana (Roth) Benth, Plumbago zeylanica L. were showed effective MIC at 0.31 mg/ml conc. (fig. 1).

CONCLUSION

The present report suggests that the effective extracts of 24 plants is a potential source of natural antidermatophytic agents against Trichophyton tonsurans. After this screening experiment, further work should be performed to describe the antifungal activities in more detail as well as their activity in-vivo. In addition, phytochemical studies will be necessary to isolate the active constituents and evaluate the antidermatophytic activities against a wide range of fungi population.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors are thankful to UGC for extending financial support and Gulbarga University for providing lab facilities.

REFERENCES

  1. Seema Bhadauria, Padma Kumar. In vitro antimycotic activity of some medicinal plants against human pathogenic dermatophytes. Indian J Fundam Appl Life Sci 2011;1:1-10.

  2. Khan SU, Khan GM, Mehsud SUK. Antifungal activities of tamarix dioica-an in vitro study. Gomal J Med Sci 2004;2:40-2.

  3. Del Poeta M, Schell WA, Perfect JR. In vitro antifungal activity of pneumocandin L-743, 872 against a variety of clinically important molds. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1997;41:1835-6.

  4. Hildick G, Smith. Antifungal antibiotics. Pediatrics Clin North Am 1968;15:107, 18.

  5. Natarajan V, Venugopal PV, Menon T. Effect of Azadirachta indica (neem) on the growth pattern of dermatophytes. Indian J Med Microbiol 2003;21:98-101.

  6. Norris HA, Elewski BE, Ghannoum MA. Optimal growth conditions for the determination of the antifungal susceptibility of three species of dermatophytes with the use of a micro dilution method. J Am Acad Dermatol 1999;40:9-13.

  7. Rioppon JW. Medical mycology the pathogenic fungi and actinomycetes. WB Saunders Company 1998;3:208-49.

  8. Sharma A. Secondary metabolites from tissue cultures of some medicinally important plants. Thesis, University of Rajasthan, Jaipur; 1988.

  9. Caceres A, Lopez B, Juarez X, Aguila J, Garcia S, Del Aguila J. Plants used in Guatemala for the treatment of dermatophytic infections 2. Evaluation of antifungal activity of seven American plants. J Ethnopharmacol 1993;3:207-13.

  10. Mehrabian S, Molabashi Z, Majd A. The antimicrobial effect of garlic (Allium sativum) extract on mouth microflora. Iran J Public Health 1995;24:39-44.

  11. Farombi EO. African indigenous plants with chemotherapeutic potential and biotechnological approach to the production of bioactive prophylactic agents. Afr J Biotechnol 2003;2:662-71.

  12. Mahesh B, Satish S. Antimicrobial activity of some medicinal plants against plant and human pathogen. World J Agric Sci 2008;4:839-43.

  13. Tiwari LC, Agarwal RG, Pandey MJ, Uniyal MR, Pandey G. Some traditional folk medicine from the Himalayas (U. P. Region). Aryavaidyan 1990;4:49-57.

  14. Rajendharan J, Mani AM, Navaneethakannan K. Antibacterial activity of some selected medicinal plant. Geobios 1998;25:280-2.

  15. Nair R, Kalariya T, Chanda S. Antibacterial activity of some selected Indian medicinal flora. Turk J Biol 2005;29:41-7.

  16. Prusti A, Mishra SR, Sahoo S, Mishra SK. Antibacterial activity of some Indian medicinal plants. Ethnobotanical Leaflets 2008;12:227-30.

  17. Cowan MM. Plant products as antimicrobial agents. Clin Microbiol Rev 1999;12:564-83.

  18. Serafin C, Nart V, Malheiros A, Cruz AB, Monache FD, Gette MA, et al. Avaliação do potencial antimicrobiano de Plinia glomerata (Myrtaceae). Revista Braseleira de Farmacognesia 2007;17:578-82.

  19. Silva JG, Souza IA, Higino JS, Siqueira-Junior JP, Pereira JV, Pereira MSV. Atividade antimicrobiana do extrato de Anacardium occidentaleLinn. em amostras multiresistentes de Staphylococcusaureus. Revista Braseleira de Farmacognesia 2007;17:572-7.

  20. Coutinho HDM, Costa JGM, Siqueira-Júnior JP, Lima EO. In vitro anti-staphylococcal activity of Hyptis martiusii Benth against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus-MRSA strains. Revista Braseleira de Farmacognesia 2008;18:670-5.

  21. Seetharam YN, Kotresh K, Upalaonkar SB. Flora of gulbarga district. Gulbarga University, Gulbarga; 2000.

  22. Santos DA. Barros MES, Hamadan JS. Establishing a method of inoculum preparation for susceptibility testing of Trichophyton rubrum and Trichophyton mentagrophytes. J Clin Microbiol 2006;1:98-101. 

  23. Hadacek, Greger. Testing of antifungal natural products: methodologies, comparability of results and assay choise. Phytochem Anal 2000;11:137-47.

  24. Magaldi S, Mata-Essayag S, Hartung de Capriles C, Perez C, Colella MT, Carolina Olaizola, et al. Well diffusion for antifungal susceptibility testing. Int J Infect Dis 2004;8:39-45.

  25. National committee for clinical laboratory standards (NCCLS). Approved Standard M2-A6, 5ed. NCCLS: Wayne, PA; 1997.

  26. Shinkafi SA, Manga SB. Isolation of dermatophytes and screening of selected medicinal plants used in the treatment of dermatophytosis. Int Res J Microbiol 2011;2:040-048.

  27. Bharathi H, Vidyasagar GM. A Comparative study: diffential antimycoses activity of crude leaf extract of Calotropis spp. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci 2012;4:705-8.

  28. Mehmood Z, Ahmad I, Mohammad F, Ahmad D. Indian medicinal plants: A potential source for anticandidal drugs. Pharm Biol 1999;37:237–42.

  29. Dhar ML, Dhar MM, Dhawan BN, Mehrotra BN, Ray C. Indian J Exp Biol 1968;6:232.

  30. Shikandar KS, Tasveer ZB, Nizam K, Gilani SA, Kazmil SU. Qualitative antifungal screening and antifungal activity of carica papya leaf extract against human and plant pathogenic fungi. Int Res J Pharm 2013;4:83-6.