Antibacterial activity of aerial parts as well as in vitro raised calli of the medicinal plant <i>Saraca asoca</i> (Roxb.) de Wilde
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Leaves, stem, and flowers of Saraca asoca, an endangered medicinal plant in India, and young explants cultivated on Murashige & Skoog's medium containing 6-benzylaminopurine were analyzed for antibacterial potential. Alcoholic and aqueous extracts from parent explants and their in vitro raised calli were tested by an agar well diffusion method. Minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of the extracts were determined by broth microdilution method. Aqueous extracts showed antibacterial activity against limited bacterial species, whereas alcoholic extracts were active against a wider range of bacteria. Although the alcoholic extracts of all the explants and calli showed antibacterial activity, the extracts derived from flowers and their calli showed better results. Extracts derived from calli showed comparable results to the extracts from explants. Overall, the MICs of the extracts ranged from 0.039 to 1.25 mg/mL. MICs against gram-positive bacteria ranged from 0.078 to 1.25 mg/mL, whereas they ranged between 0.039 and 0.625 mg/mL against gram-negative bacteria. A MIC distribution plot showed that gram-negative bacteria were more susceptible to the extracts than gram-positive bacteria. It is concluded that extracts of S. asoca contain antibacterial agent, and as the calli gave good results, in vitro cultivation of the explants may be used to obtain antibacterial compounds. This is the first report on antibacterial activity of S. asoca, especially through in vitro raised calli.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".