Phytochemical Screening and Antioxidant Profile of Syngonium podophyllum Schott Stems: A Fecund Phytopharmakon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Oxidative stress has been shown to play an imperative role in copious disease pathology. Plants are acquaintances of mankind and mainstay for the treatment of oxidative stress linked disorders. Therefore, the objective of the existing study was to assess the phytochemical contents and antioxidant activity of crude methanol extract (CME), n-hexane (NHF), chloroform (CLF), ethyl acetate (EAF) and aqueous (AQF) fractions of Syngonium podophyllum (S. podophyllum) Schott stems.Methods: The S. podophyllum Schott stems extract and its fractions were subjected to phytochemical analysis to detect the presence of alkaloids, carbohydrates, saponins, tannins, resins, flavonoids and steroids. The antioxidant profile was determined by total antioxidant activity (TAA), reducing power activity (RPA) and DPPH (2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl) radical scavenging activity tests and correlated with the estimation of total flavonoid content (TFC).Results: In CME and its fractions of S. podophyllum Schott stems all of the tested phytoconstituents (alkaloids, tannins, resins, flavonoids and steroids) were detected at various concentration except carbohydrates and saponins. In TAA test, highest absorbance (2.18 nm) which is a measure of high antioxidant activity was reported in CME compared to remaining fractions. Likely in RPA test with respect to all fractions similar denouements were found for CME (3.29 nm). In case of DPPH scavenging test, the CME showed highest scavenging activity (77.89 %) having IC50 of 41.02 ?g/ml (P < 0.05) compared to remaining fractions. The antioxidant activity is possibly due to the highest TFC (7.45 mg of GAE/g of dried extract) reported in CME compared to existing fractions.Conclusion: The aforementioned outcomes recommend that CME of S. podophyllum Schott stems can be a possible cradle of plant-derived natural antioxidant and can be used to avert diseases linked with free radicals.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".