article · Current Bioactive Compounds
Introduction: Understanding the bioactivity of isolated plant metabolites and their behavior within complex extracts is essential for interpreting pharmacological effects. In this study, we compared the bioactivity of purified artemetin, with that of multi-component plant fraction containing artemetin. Methods: Pure artemetin crystals and a concentrated diethyl ether fraction DEF were profiled by HPLC. Antioxidant capacity was assessed using the ferric reducing power (FRAP) and the β-carotene bleaching model. Antibacterial activity was evaluated against Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, whereas antifungal activity was tested against Aspergillus niger, Candida glabrata, and Penicillium digitatum. In silico investigations included molecular docking, ADME analysis, and toxicity prediction. Results: The crystalline fraction contained 99.1% artemetin, whereas DEF contained artemetin together with additional phenolic compounds. DEF showed stronger antioxidant activity (IC50 = 2.54 mg/Ml) compared with pure artemetin (IC50 = 8.28 mg/mL), whereas artemetin exhibited stronger antibacterial and antifungal effects. For antibacterial activity against Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, DEF showed an MIC of 16.66 μg/mL, while artemetin showed MIC values of 10-10.625 μg/mL. For antifungal activity against Aspergillus niger, Candida glabrata, and Penicillium digitatum, DEF exhibited an MIC of 8.33 μg/mL, whereas artemetin showed MIC values of 0.312-1.25 μg/mL. Discussion: The higher antioxidant activity of the extract suggests synergistic effects, while reduced antimicrobial activity indicates possible antagonism from co-existing compounds. Docking supported the strong binding of artemetin to the selected biological targets. Conclusion: Artemetin shows lower MIC values than cycloheximide against Aspergillus niger and Candida glabrata, suggesting promising antifungal potential.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.2174/0115734072456719260814145703
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.