Propiedades antirradicales libres y antibacterianas de extractos de corteza de pino
Free radicals scavengers of ethanolic and aqueous extracts from Pinus ayacahuite, Pinus cooperi, Pinus durangensis, Pinus leiophylla and Pinus teocote bark were evaluated, using the diphenylpicrylhydrazyl (DPPH) radical assay, to extract concentrations of (250, 500, 750, 1000 and 1250) mg L-1. The s...
| Egile Nagusiak: | , , |
|---|---|
| Formatua: | Online |
| Hizkuntza: | spa |
| Argitaratua: |
Instituto de Ecología, A.C.
2016
|
| Sarrera elektronikoa: | https://myb.ojs.inecol.mx/index.php/myb/article/view/1249 |
| _version_ | 1799769255032389632 |
|---|---|
| author | Rosales Castro, Martha Pérez López, María Elena Ponce Rodríguez, María del Carmen |
| author_facet | Rosales Castro, Martha Pérez López, María Elena Ponce Rodríguez, María del Carmen |
| author_sort | Rosales Castro, Martha |
| collection | MYB |
| description | Free radicals scavengers of ethanolic and aqueous extracts from Pinus ayacahuite, Pinus cooperi, Pinus durangensis, Pinus leiophylla and Pinus teocote bark were evaluated, using the diphenylpicrylhydrazyl (DPPH) radical assay, to extract concentrations of (250, 500, 750, 1000 and 1250) mg L-1. The scavengers were compared with butilhydroxitolueno (BHT) and butilhydroxianisol (BHA) . Ethanolic extracts had higher activity than the aqueous one, specially P. leiophylla and P. durangensis, with scavengers at500 mg L-1 of (90,4 ± 0,98) % and (83,0 ± 1,41) %, similar to BHA (83,6 ± 0,20) % and higher than BHT (50,3 ± 0,72) %. Other than P. cooperi all extracts showed scavengers higher to 90,0 % at 1250 mg L-1. The concentration for scavengers 50,0 % of radical (CE50) was evaluated. The antimicrobial activity of the extracts was evaluated using agar dilution method against Staphylococcus aureus, Enterococcus sp., Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa to concentrations of (0,625, 2,5, 5,0, 10,0 and 20,0) mg/mL. The minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) was reported. Ethanolic extracts had higher activity than the aqueous one. S. aureus was the most inhibited (MIC 0,625 mg/mL), Enterococcus sp. moderaty inhibited (MIC 2,5 mg/mL), E. coli do not had a good inhibition (MIC 10,0 to 20,0) mg/mL. P. aeruginosa only was efficiently inhibited by P. cooperi (2,5 mg/mL) ethanolic extract. |
| format | Online |
| id | oai:oai.myb.ojs.inecol.mx:article-1249 |
| institution | Madera y Bosques |
| language | spa |
| publishDate | 2016 |
| publisher | Instituto de Ecología, A.C. |
| record_format | ojs |
| spelling | oai:oai.myb.ojs.inecol.mx:article-12492022-11-30T00:44:54Z Propiedades antirradicales libres y antibacterianas de extractos de corteza de pino Propiedades antirradicales libres y antibacterianas de extractos de corteza de pino Rosales Castro, Martha Pérez López, María Elena Ponce Rodríguez, María del Carmen Antibacterian activity Pinus bark DPPH extracts Actividad antibacteriana corteza de pino DPPH extractos Free radicals scavengers of ethanolic and aqueous extracts from Pinus ayacahuite, Pinus cooperi, Pinus durangensis, Pinus leiophylla and Pinus teocote bark were evaluated, using the diphenylpicrylhydrazyl (DPPH) radical assay, to extract concentrations of (250, 500, 750, 1000 and 1250) mg L-1. The scavengers were compared with butilhydroxitolueno (BHT) and butilhydroxianisol (BHA) . Ethanolic extracts had higher activity than the aqueous one, specially P. leiophylla and P. durangensis, with scavengers at500 mg L-1 of (90,4 ± 0,98) % and (83,0 ± 1,41) %, similar to BHA (83,6 ± 0,20) % and higher than BHT (50,3 ± 0,72) %. Other than P. cooperi all extracts showed scavengers higher to 90,0 % at 1250 mg L-1. The concentration for scavengers 50,0 % of radical (CE50) was evaluated. The antimicrobial activity of the extracts was evaluated using agar dilution method against Staphylococcus aureus, Enterococcus sp., Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa to concentrations of (0,625, 2,5, 5,0, 10,0 and 20,0) mg/mL. The minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) was reported. Ethanolic extracts had higher activity than the aqueous one. S. aureus was the most inhibited (MIC 0,625 mg/mL), Enterococcus sp. moderaty inhibited (MIC 2,5 mg/mL), E. coli do not had a good inhibition (MIC 10,0 to 20,0) mg/mL. P. aeruginosa only was efficiently inhibited by P. cooperi (2,5 mg/mL) ethanolic extract. Se evaluó la actividad de captura de radicales libres de extractos etanólicos y acuosos de la corteza de Pinus ayacahuite, Pinus cooperi, Pinus durangensis, Pinus leiophylla y Pinus teocote, utilizando el método del radical difenilpicrilhidracilo (DPPH) , a concentraciones de extracto de (250, 500, 750, 1000 y 1250) mg L-1. La actividad se comparó con la de los antioxidantes comerciales butilhydroxitolueno (BHT) y butilhydroxianisol (BHA) . Los extractos etanólicos presentaron mayor actividad que los acuosos, sobresaliendo las especies P. leiophylla y P. durangensis, con capacidades antirradicales a 500 mg L-1 de (90,4 ± 0,98) % y (83,0 ± a 41) %, similares a BHA (83,6 ± 0,20) % y superiores a BHT (50,3 ± 0,72). A excepción de P. cooperi, todos los extractos, tanto etanólicos como acuosos presentaron actividad superior al 90,0 % a 1250 mg L-1. Se calculó la concentración para inhibir el 50,0 % de los radicales (CE50) . La actividad antibacteriana se evaluó por el método de dilución en agar, sobre Staphylococcus aureus, Enterococcus sp., Escherichia coli y Pseudomonas aeruginosa a concentraciones de (0,625, 2,5, 5,0, 10,0 y 20,0) mg/mL. Se reportó como la concentración mínima inhibitoria (CMI) para impedir el crecimiento bacteriano. En general los extractos etanólicos mostraron mayor inhibición que los acuosos, S. aureus se inhibió eficientemente (CMI 0,625 mg/mL), Enterococcus sp., moderadamente (CMI 2,5 mg/mL), E. coli no tuvo buena inhibición (CMI 10,0 a 20,0) mg/mL y P. aeruginosa solo se inhibió eficientemente por el extracto etanólico de P. cooperi (2 ,5 mg/mL ). Instituto de Ecología, A.C. 2016-08-31 info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Artículo evaluado por pares application/pdf https://myb.ojs.inecol.mx/index.php/myb/article/view/1249 10.21829/myb.2006.1211249 Madera y Bosques; Vol. 12 No. 1 (2006): Primavera 2006; 37-49 Madera y Bosques; Vol. 12 Núm. 1 (2006): Primavera 2006; 37-49 2448-7597 1405-0471 spa https://myb.ojs.inecol.mx/index.php/myb/article/view/1249/1419 Derechos de autor 2016 Madera y Bosques |
| spellingShingle | Rosales Castro, Martha Pérez López, María Elena Ponce Rodríguez, María del Carmen Propiedades antirradicales libres y antibacterianas de extractos de corteza de pino |
| title | Propiedades antirradicales libres y antibacterianas de extractos de corteza de pino |
| title_full | Propiedades antirradicales libres y antibacterianas de extractos de corteza de pino |
| title_fullStr | Propiedades antirradicales libres y antibacterianas de extractos de corteza de pino |
| title_full_unstemmed | Propiedades antirradicales libres y antibacterianas de extractos de corteza de pino |
| title_short | Propiedades antirradicales libres y antibacterianas de extractos de corteza de pino |
| title_sort | propiedades antirradicales libres y antibacterianas de extractos de corteza de pino |
| url | https://myb.ojs.inecol.mx/index.php/myb/article/view/1249 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT rosalescastromartha propiedadesantirradicaleslibresyantibacterianasdeextractosdecortezadepino AT perezlopezmariaelena propiedadesantirradicaleslibresyantibacterianasdeextractosdecortezadepino AT poncerodriguezmariadelcarmen propiedadesantirradicaleslibresyantibacterianasdeextractosdecortezadepino |
