Anthelmintic Activity of Extracts and Active Compounds From Diospyros anisandra on Ancylostoma caninum, Haemonchus placei and Cyathostomins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study aimed to evaluate the anthelmintic activity of leaf and bark extracts of Diospyros anisandra collected during different seasons and their major constituents on eggs of Ancylostoma caninum, Haemonchus placei and cyathostomins. Specifically, the eclosion inhibition of the methanolic extracts of the leaves and bark of D. anisandra collected during the dry and rainy seasons (600–37.5 µg/ml) were evaluated in addition to the fractions, sub-fractions (300–37.5 µg/ml) and active major constituents (150–2.3 µg/ml). The rainy season bark extract had the highest percentage of eclosion inhibition (PEI) against the evaluated nematodes (≥ 90% at 75 µg/ml) along with high ovicidal activity (90.0% to 93.4% at 75 µg/ml). The purification of the rainy season bark extract showed that its biological activity came from the non-polar n-hexane fraction (≥ 93% at 75 µg/ml). The bioguided fractionation pointed to sub-fraction 5 as having the highest anthelmintic activity against the three evaluated genera of nematodes (PEI ≥ 93% at 37.5 µg/ml). Gas chromatography and mass spectrometry revealed that the major constituent in sub-fraction 5 was plumbagin. Upon evaluation, plumbagin was confirmed to be responsible for the anthelmintic activity of D. anisandra, with a PEI ≥ 90% at 2.3 µg/ml on the three evaluated nematodes. Additionally, the compounds betulin and lupeol in the bark of D. anisandra were evaluated but presented low anthelmintic activity (PEI ≤ 5.3% at 2.3 µg/ml). In conclusion, the rainy season bark extract of D. anisandra exerts a high ovicidal activity against the eggs of the three studied nematodes. Plumbagin is the active compound responsible for this activity and represents a potential alternative for the control of different genera of gastrointestinal nematodes given the current scenario of anthelmintic resistance.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".