Film dressings from Thai mango seed kernel extracts versus nanocrystalline silver dressings in antibacterial properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The extract from the Mango Seed Kernel (MSK) has been documented to exhibit antibacterial activity against Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, including Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. This suggests that biomaterials containing MSK extract could be a viable alternative to conventional wound treatments, such as nanocrystalline silver dressings. Despite this potential, there is a notable gap in the literature regarding comparing the antibacterial effectiveness of MSK film dressings with nanocrystalline silver dressings. This study aimed to develop film dressings containing MSK extract and evaluate their antibacterial properties compared to nanocrystalline silver dressings. Additionally, the study aimed to assess other vital physical properties of these dressings critical for effective wound care. Materials and methods: We prepared MSK film dressings from two cultivars of mango from Thailand, ‘Chokanan’ and ‘Namdokmai’. The inhibition-zone method was employed to determine the antibacterial property. The morphology and chemical characterization of the prepared MSK film dressings were examined with scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and Fourier-Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR), respectively. The absorption of pseudo-wound exudate and water vapor transmission rate (WVTR) of film dressings were evaluated. Results: The results showed that 40% of MSKC film dressing had the highest inhibition zone (20.00 ± 0.00 mm against S. aureus and 17.00 ± 1.00 mm against P. aeruginosa) and 20%, 30%, and 40% of MSKC and MSKN film dressings had inhibition zones similar to nanocrystalline silver dressing for both S. aureus and P. aeruginosa (p > 0.05). In addition, all concentrations of the MSK film dressings had low absorption capacity, and Chokanan MSK (MSKC) film dressings had a higher WVTR than Namdokmai MSK (MSKN) film dressings. Conclusion: 20%, 30%, and 40% of MSK film dressing is nearly as effective as nanocrystalline silver dressing. Therefore, it has the potential to be an alternative antibacterial dressing and is suitable for wounds with low exudate levels.
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".