↓ Skip to main content

Antibacterial efficacy of local plants and their contribution to public health in rural Ethiopia

Overview of attention for article published in Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Antibacterial efficacy of local plants and their contribution to public health in rural Ethiopia
Published in
Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13756-017-0236-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gutema Taressa Tura, Wondwossen Birke Eshete, Gudina Terefe Tucho

Abstract

Proper hand hygiene with soap and detergents prevents the transmission of many infectious diseases. However, commercial detergents are less likely to be accessible or affordable to poor people in remote rural areas. These people traditionally use some plant parts as a detergent even though their antibacterial activity has not been yet investigated. Therefore, this study aims to determine the antibacterial activities of some of the plants against bacteria isolated from humans. Plants selected for this study are Phytolacca dodecandra fruits, Rumex nepalensis leaves, Grewia ferruginea bark and leaves. The samples of these plants were collected from rural areas of Jimma town based on their ethno-botanical survey and information on their local use. Acetone was used as a solvent to extract the bioactive constituents of the plants. The antibacterial activities of the plants were evaluated against reference strains and bacteria isolated from humans using disc diffusion and macro dilution methods. The plant extracts have shown varying antimicrobial activities against the bacterial species tested. Susceptibility testing shows zones of inhibition ranging from 8.0 ± 1.0 mm to 20.7 ± 5.5 mm. The MIC and MBC of the plants against the bacterial species tested were 3.13 and 12.5 mg/ml respectively. These variations are attributed to different concentrations of the bioactive constituents of the extracts like saponins, tannins, flavonoids and terpenoids. The studied plants can contribute to achieve better personal hygiene since they are effective against different bacterial agents and are freely available in rural areas.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 98 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 16%
Student > Master 11 11%
Lecturer 7 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 5%
Student > Postgraduate 5 5%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 42 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 11 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 6%
Chemistry 6 6%
Environmental Science 5 5%
Other 19 19%
Unknown 41 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 August 2017.
All research outputs
#15,746,742
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control
#1,029
of 1,347 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,069
of 319,629 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control
#28
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,347 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 319,629 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.