Antifungal activity of plant extracts against dermatophytes
Abstract
The aqueous extracts (15 μg ml−1 medium) of 22 plants used in folkloric medicine in Palestine were investigated for their antifungal activity and minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) against nine isolates of Microsporum canis, Trichophyton mentagrophytes and Trichophyton violaceum. The extract of the different plant species reduced colony growth of the three dermatophytes by 36 to 100% compared with the control treatment. Antimycotic activity of the extract against the three dermatophytes varied significantly (P<0.05) between test plants. Extracts of Capparis spinosa and Juglans regia completely prevented growth of M. canis and T. violaceum. The most active extracts (90–100% inhibition) were those of Anagallis arvensis, C. spinosa, J. regia, Pistacia lentiscus and Ruta chalapensis against M. canis; Inula viscosa, J. regia and P. lentiscus against T. mentagrophytes; and Asphodelus luteus, A. arvensis, C. spinosa, Clematis cirrhosa, I. viscosa, J. regia, P. lentiscus, Plumbago europea, Ruscus aculeatus, Retema raetam and Salvia fruticosa against T. violaceum. The MICs of these most active plants ranged from 0.6 to 40 μg ml−1. The three dermatophytes differed significantly with regard to their susceptibility to plant extracts. Trichophyton violaceum was the most susceptible being completely inhibited by 50% of the extracts followed by M. canis and T. mentagrophytes which were completely inhibited by only 23 and 14% of the extracts, respectively.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Poisoned food method is mostly used to evaluate the antifungal effect against molds.
“Poisoned food method is mostly used to evaluate the antifungal effect against molds [37], [38], [39].”
From Methods for in vitro evaluating antimicrobial activity: A review (2016) · cites this paper as [37]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Methods for in vitro evaluating antimicrobial activity: A review
Balouiri, M., Sadiki, M., & Ibnsouda, S. K. (2016) · Journal of Pharmaceutical Analysis · doi:10.1016/j.jpha.2015.11.005 · Cited by 7,264 · see citing works
- Authors
- Ali‐Shtayeh, M. S., & Abu Ghdeib, S. I.
- Venue
- Mycoses
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1999-12
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 11-12
- Pages
- 665-672
- ISSN
- 0027-5557 (ISSN-L)
- 0933-7407
- 1439-0507
- OpenAlex
- W1972343132
- Cited by
- 326
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 16
- FWCI
- 3.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Mycoses (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Essential Oils and Antimicrobial Activity
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Nail Diseases and Treatments
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Ethnobotanical and Medicinal Plants Studies
- Keywords
- antifungal activity, plant extracts, dermatophytes, Microsporum canis, Trichophyton mentagrophytes, Trichophyton violaceum, minimum inhibitory concentration, folk medicine, Capparis spinosa, Juglans regia, Pistacia lentiscus, Inula viscosa, Salvia fruticosa, dermatophytosis
- MeSH terms
- Antifungal Agents, Arthrodermataceae, Microbial Sensitivity Tests, Microsporum, Plant Extracts, Plants, Medicinal, Trichophyton
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review