Surface Functionalization of TiO2 with Plant Extracts and their Combined Antimicrobial Activities Against E. faecalis and E. Coli
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study is to enhance the antibacterial activity of TiO2 by pure plant extracts of Bauhinia variegata and Tinospora. cordifolia by making a composite of plant extract and TiO2. Plant extracts, TiO2 and plant extracts/TiO2 composites were investigated against two bacterial strain Enterococcus faecalis and Escherichia coli. X-ray diffraction investigations have confirmed the presence of TiO2 nanoparticles in the plant extract/TiO2 nanocomposites. UV-visible investigations have shown an enhanced photocatalytic activity of plant extract/TiO2 nanocomposites compared to that of pure TiO2 and pure plant extract. Plant extract/TiO2 nanocomposites have shown various level of antibacterial activity on different test microorganisms. The highest antibacterial potentiality expressed in terms of zone of inhibition (ZOI) in mm was exhibited by the aqueous extract of Bauhinia variegata /TiO2 (45 mm against Enterococcus faecalis and 30 mm against Escherichia coli) and benzene extract of Tinospora cordifolia /TiO2 (26 mm) nanocomposites. This is the first study on these types of bio-nano composite materials and it serves as basis for further research on these types of composite materials as a potent antibacterial agent.
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".