1. Background
2. Objectives
3. Methods
3.1. Chemicals
3.2. Plant Materials
3.3. Extraction
3.4. Toxicity Bioassay Tests
3.5. Determination of Scavenging Activities of Four Extractives
3.6. Association between Cytotoxicity Properties and Free Radical Scavenging Activities in Four Plant Extracts
4. Results
| Test Sample | Con. (µg/ mL) | Log Conc. | Total Noa | No of Dead | % Mortality | Corrected % Mortality | Expected % Mortality | (O - Ea)2 | ∑D | X2b |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CD | 400 | 2.602 | 30 | 28 | 93.33 | 92.59 | 94.00 | 1.98 | 0.1179 | 3.53 |
| 200 | 2.301 | 30 | 25.00 | 81.76 | 80.46 | 67.00 | 181.17 | |||
| 100 | 2.000 | 30 | 9.00 | 28.86 | 17.94 | 25.00 | 49.84 | |||
| 50 | 1.698 | 30 | 4.00 | 12.20 | 2.48 | 4.00 | 2.29 | |||
| RS | 400 | 2.602 | 30 | 28.00 | 91.10 | 90.82 | 85.00 | 33.87 | 0.1019 | 3.27 |
| 200 | 2.301 | 30 | 19.00 | 61.10 | 59.79 | 57.00 | 7.79 | |||
| 100 | 2.000 | 30 | 9.00 | 28.86 | 26.40 | 25.00 | 1.96 | |||
| 50 | 1.698 | 30 | 5.00 | 15.53 | 12.65 | 6.00 | 44.22 | |||
| CU | 320 | 2.505 | 30 | 26.00 | 86.66 | 85.65 | 89.00 | 11.22 | 0.0379 | 1.14 |
| 160 | 2.204 | 30 | 13.00 | 43.33 | 39.29 | 40.00 | 0.50 | |||
| 80 | 1.993 | 30 | 4.00 | 13.33 | 7.17 | 4.00 | 10.05 | |||
| SN | 160 | 2.204 | 30 | 17.00 | 56.66 | 56.16 | 48.00 | 66.59 | 0.0412 | 1.24 |
| 80 | 1.903 | 30 | 5.00 | 16.66 | 15.75 | 19.00 | 10.56 | |||
| 40 | 1.602 | 30 | 2.00 | 6.66 | 5.72 | 4.00 | 2.96 | |||
| VS | 8 | 0.903 | 30 | 21.00 | 70.00 | 55.83 | 68.00 | 148.11 | 0.1046 | 3.14 |
| 4 | 0.602 | 30 | 13.00 | 43.00 | 35.07 | 44.00 | 79.74 | |||
| 2 | 0.301 | 30 | 9.00 | 30.00 | 20.27 | 23.00 | 7.45 | |||
| 1 | 0 | 30 | 6.00 | 20.00 | 8.88 | 9.00 | 0.01 |
Abbreviations: CD, C. draba; CU, C. uliginosa; RS, R. sylvestris; SN, S. nummularia; VS, vincristine sulfate.
aThree sets of tests used in this bioassay.
bX2 values of Chi - Square distribution table ranging from 3.84 to 5.99 with df = 1 and 2, respectively.
| Test Samples | LC 50 (μg/mL) | 95% Confidence Limit | Regression Equation | R2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower → Upper | ||||
| Ethanolic extract of C. draba | 147.21 ± 4.13 | 113.14 → 191.26 | Y = 3.577 × X - 2.7964 | 0.9752 |
| Ethanolic extract of S. nummularia | 162.97 ± 4.95 | 109.95 → 238.40 | Y = 2.807 × X - 1.232 | 0.9630 |
| Ethanolic extract of R. sylvestris | 169.39 ± 4.29 | 127.91 → 223.97 | Y = 2.780 × X - 1.2269 | 0.9940 |
| Ethanolic extract of C. uliginosa | 176.88 ± 4.80 | 141.00 → 222.44 | Y = 4.950 × X - 6.160 | 0.9990 |
| VS (positive control ) | 5.46 ± 0.76 | 3.38 → 8.97 | Y = 1.993 × X + 3.670 | 0.9980 |
| Test Sample | Con. (μg/ mL) | Log Conc. | Total Noa | No of Dead | % Mortality | Corrected % Mortality | Expected % Mortality | (O - Ea)2 | ∑d | X2b |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CU | 320 | 2.505 | 30 | 29 | 96.67 | 94.14 | 94.00 | 0.01 | 0.0559 | 1.67 |
| 160 | 2.204 | 30 | 24.00 | 78.90 | 62.14 | 67.00 | 23.62 | |||
| 80 | 1.903 | 30 | 18.00 | 60.00 | 28.09 | 25.50 | 6.71 | |||
| 40 | 1.602 | 30 | 11.00 | 37.80 | 0 | 4 | 16.00 | |||
| SN | 160 | 2.204 | 30 | 25.00 | 84.47 | 77.55 | 77.00 | 0.30 | 0.0164 | 0.49 |
| 80 | 1.903 | 30 | 14.00 | 45.57 | 21.01 | 25.00 | 15.91 | |||
| 40 | 1.602 | 30 | 10.00 | 33.34 | 3.24 | 2.00 | 1.53 | |||
| RS | 200 | 2.301 | 30 | 28.00 | 94.43 | 79.11 | 80.50 | 1.92 | 0.1606 | 4.82 |
| 100 | 2.00 | 30 | 26.00 | 86.66 | 49.98 | 45.00 | 24.81 | |||
| 50 | 1.698 | 30 | 22.00 | 73.33 | 0 | 13.00 | 169.00 | |||
| CD | 200 | 2.301 | 30 | 28.00 | 94.43 | 83.29 | 80.50 | 7.80 | 0.0339 | 1.01 |
| 100 | 2.00 | 30 | 26.00 | 85.53 | 56.59 | 49.00 | 57.73 | |||
| 50 | 1.698 | 30 | 24.00 | 78.86 | 36.61 | 33.00 | 13.03 | |||
| VS | 2 | 0.301 | 30 | 29.00 | 96.66 | 95.14 | 96.00 | 0.74 | 0.03926 | 1.18 |
| 1 | 0 | 30 | 27.00 | 90.00 | 85.71 | 79.00 | 0.45 | |||
| 0.5 | -0.301 | 30 | 17.00 | 56.66 | 38.00 | 43.00 | 0.25 |
Abbreviations: CD, C. draba; CU, C. uliginosa; RS, R. sylvestris; SN, S. nummularia; VS, vincristine sulfate.
aThree sets of tests used in this bioassay.
bX2 values of Chi - Square distribution table ranging from 3.84 to 5.99 with df = 1 and 2, respectively.
| Test Samples | LC 50 ( μg/mL) | 95 % Confidence Limit | Regression Equation | R2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower → Upper | ||||
| Ethanolic extract of C. draba | 78.17 ± 3.10 | 57.33 → 106.57 | Y = 2.12 × X + 0.9779 | 0.9820 |
| Ethanolic extract of R. sylvestris | 105.37 ± 2.86 | 82.03 → 135.34 | Y = 3.2721 × X - 1.668 | 0.9986 |
| Ethanolic extract of S. nummalaria | 110.49 ± 3.28 | 81.32 → 150.12 | Y = 4.518 × X - 4.224 | 0.9810 |
| Ethanolic extract of C. uliginosa | 120.97 ± 2.73 | 96.03 → 152.37 | Y = 3.591 × X - 2.457 | 0.9970 |
| VS (positive control ) | 1.02 ± 0.18 | 0.78 → 1.34 | Y = 1.545 × X + 6.437 | 0.9935 |

