Phytochemical Investigation and Determination of Antibacterial Activity of Solvent Leave Extracts of Carissa spinarum

Figures & data

Figure 1 The leaves of Carissa spinarum.

Figure 2 Powdered leaves of Carissa spinarum.

Figure 3 Zone of inhibition shown by methanol fraction of leaves of Carissa spinarum.

Figure 4 Zone of inhibition shown by ethyl acetate fraction of leaves of Carissa spinarum.

Figure 5 Zone of inhibition shown by chloroform fraction of leaves of Carissa spinarum.

Table 1 Phytochemical Screening Test of Different Solvent Leave Extracts of Carissa spinarum

Metabolites Tested	Extracts
	Methanol	Ethyl Acetate	Chloroform
Alkaloids	+	+	+
Saponins	+	+	−
Tannins	+	+	−
Phenols	+	+	+
Terpenoids	+	+	−
Flavonoids	+	+	+
Cardiac Glycosides	+−	−	−

Note: (+) present and (−) absent.

Table 2 Antibacterial Activities of the Methanol, Chloroform, and Ethyl Acetate Leaf Extracts of Carissa spinarum Using Disc Diffusion Techniques

Extracts	Control	Concentration	Average Zone of Inhibition (Mean ±SEM in mm)
			E. coli	K. pneumonae	S. pneumonae	S. aureus
Methanol		100 mg/mL	11.0±0.333^a,b	11.0 ± 0.23^b	11.0± 0.57^b	13.0± 0.68^a,b
	Gentamycin	10 µg/disc	14.0±0.577	13±0.13	12±34	20.0± 0.57^a,b
Ethyl acetate		100 mg/mL	10.0±0.333	10.0±0.72	10.0±0.24^a,b	9.0± 0.32
	Gentamycin	10 µg/disc	13.0±0.34	12.67±0.333	11.23±0.33	20.0± 0.54^a,b
Chloroform		100 mg/mL	8.67±0.22	7.0±0.41	9.0±0.27	8.0± 0.17
	Gentamycin	10 µg/disc	12.0±0.31	11.31±0.33	10.0±0.65	20.0± 0.19^b

Notes: Values expressed as mean ±SEM for n=3. The mean comparisons for different extracts and control (gentamycin 10 µg) were performed by one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey's HSD post hoc multiple comparison test. Where, compared to ^aethyl acetate, ^bchloroform, p<0.05.

Table 3 IR Spectrum of Compound TA

Group	IR Absorption (cm^−1) of Compound TA	Estimated Value (cm^−1)
-OH	3400 and 3230	3400–2400
C-H stretch	2884 and 2830	3000–2840
C=O	1700	1780–1650
CH2 bending	1465	1465
CH3 bending	1375	1375
C-O stretch	1235 and 1055	1300–1000

Table 4 ¹H-NMR Spectrum of Compound TA in Comparison with Estimated Value

Proton	Observed ^1H-NMR Chemical Shift of Compound TA in (DMSO)	Estimated Value
C1-OOH	Off chart to the left	12
C2-H	4.17	4.17
C2-OH	2.0	2.0
C3-H	3.7	3.7
C3-OH	2.0	2.0
C4-H	3.6	3.62
C4-OH	2.0	2.0
C5-H2	3.62 and 3.4	3.64 and 3.39
C1’-H	2.9	2.95
C2’-H	3.6	3.57
C2’-OH	2.0	2.0
C3’-H	3.2	3.33
C3^’-OH	2.0	2.0
C4’-H	3.6	3.57
C4’-OH	2.0	2.0
C5’-H	2.9	2.95
C6’-H	3.80	3.81
C6’-OH	2.0	2.0
C1’’-H3	3.2	3.24

Table 5 ¹³C-NMR and DEPT-135 Spectra of Compound TA in Comparison with Estimated Value

Position Carbon	Observed ^13C-NMR Chemical Shift of Compound TA (DMSO)	Estimated Value	DEPT-135
1	174	173.2	Quaternary
2	74.11	73.9	CH
3	72.65	73.1	CH
4	70.39	70.0	CH
5	71.08	70.4	CH2
1’	81.51	78.4	CH
2’	70.87	70.2	CH
3’	72.48	73.0	CH
4’	69.58	69.9	CH
5’	82.74	80.3	CH
6’	68.41	67.7	CH
1’’	57.87	57.7	CH3

Figure 6 Proposed structure of compound TA.