Detection of Antibacterial Activity in Spent Roots of Two Genotypes of Aromatic Grass Vetiveria zizanioides.

Figures & data

Table 1.. Plant parts used for preparing extracts of Vetiveria zizanioides..

Plant part	Variety	Extractingsolvent	Percentage yieldof extracts (%)
Root (intact)	gulabi.	Hexane	2.50
Root (spent)	gulabi.	Hexane	1.75
Inflorescence	gulabi.	Hexane	0.16
Root (intact)	KS-1	Hexane	0.41
Root (spent)	KS-1	Hexane	0.95
Inflorescence	KS-1	Hexane	0.14

Table 2.. Bacterial strains used in the present study.

Strains	Drug-resistance property	Reference
M. smegmatis.
MC^2 155	Wild type (sensitive to quinolones and fluoroquinolones)	Snapper et al. (1988)
MSR 101	Resistance to ciprofloxacin, lomofloxacin, norfloxacin	Sinha (2003)
MSR 102	Resistance to rifampicin, tetracycline, chloramphenicol	Sinha (2003)
MDR-40	Resistance to rifampicin, ampicillin, kanamycin	Singh (2004)
MDR-75	Resistance to isoniazid, streptomycin, cephalosporin	Singh (2004)
CSMC^2 105	Resistance to ciprofloxacin	Srivastava (2002)
CSLMC^2 205	Resistance to lomofloxacin	Srivastava (2002)
E. coli.
CA 8000	Wild type (sensitive to quinolones and fluoroquinolones)	Kumar (1976)
NK 5819	Resistance to nalidixic acid	Santha et al. (2000)

Table 3.. Antibacterial activity of the extracts of root and inflorescence of Vetiveria zizanioides. var gulabi. and KS-1 (zone of inhibition in millimeters).^a.

	Mycobacterium smegmatis.							Escherichia coli.
Vetiveria zizanioides.	MC^2 155	MSR101	MSR102	MDR-40	MDR-75	CSMC^2 105	CSLMC^2 205	CA 8000	NK 5819
Var. gulabi.
Root (intact)	5	6	3	2	5	1	4	0	5
Root (spent)	5	4	8	4	5	4	0	0	3
Inflorescence	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Var. KS-1
Root (intact)	4	5	4	2	5	3	2	0	4
Root (spent)	6	3	4	1	3	3	2	0	3
Inflorescence	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Ciprofloxacin	34	32	31	37	34	14	28	34	32
Lomofloxacin	39	30	33	37	31	11	0	29	31
Nalidixic acid	0	18	0	0	16	0	15	18	19
DMSO	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

^a.Values are mean of five experiments in triplicate.

Table 4.. Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC µg/ml) of hexane extracts of Vetiveria zizanioides. varieties gulabi. and KS-1 on wild-type and drug-resistant strains of M. smegmatis. and E. coli..^a.

	Mycobacterium smegmatis.							Escherichia coli.
Vetiveria zizanioides.	MC^2 155	MSR101	MSR102	MDR-40	MDR-75	CSMC^2 105	CSLMC^2 205	CA 8000	NK 5819
Var. gulabi.
Root (intact)	62.5	62.5	125	62.5	125	125	15.625	> 1000	1000
Root (spent)	62.5	31.25	62.5	62.5	125	62.5	31.25	> 1000	1000
Var. KS-1
Root (intact)	125	62.5	62.5	31.25	125	125	31.25	> 1000	> 500
Root (spent)	125	62.5	31.25	62.5	250	125	31.25	> 1000	1000
Ciprofloxacin	0.78	3.125	3.125	> 25	3.125	25	25	0.78	0.78
Lomofloxacin	0.78	<01	10	2.5	0.78	> 50	> 50	<01	0.78
Nalidixic acid	50	6.25	50	50	3.125	50	25	6.25	1.56

^a.Values are mean of five experiments in triplicate.

Snapper SB, Lugosi L, Jekkel A, Melton RE, Kieser T, Bloom BR, Jacobs WR (1988): Lysogeny and transformation in Mycobacteria.: Stable expression of foreign genes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 85: 6987–6991. [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA]

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Sinha P (2003): Isolating plant derived antimycobacterial compounds through construction of novel target based bioscreens. Ph.D. Thesis, Barkatullah University, Bhopal, India.

 Google Scholar

Singh M (2004): Isolation and characterisation of multi drug resistant mutants in Mycobacterium smegmatis.. M.Sc. Thesis, Barkatullah University, Bhopal, India.

 Google Scholar

Srivastava S (2002): Bioprospecting potent plant compounds targeted to inhibit cell wall synthesis and DNA replication in Mycobacterium smegmatis.. Ph.D. Thesis, Devi Ahilya Vishwavidyalaya, Indore, India.

 Google Scholar

Kumar S (1976): Properties of adenyl cyclase and cyclic adenosine 3′–5′ monophosphate receptor protein deficient mutants of Escherichia coli.. J Bacteriol 125: 545–555. [PUBMED], [INFOTRIEVE], [CSA]

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar