ABSTRACT
Infectious diseases are traditionally managed using medicinal herbs in traditional Chinese medicine, Ayurveda and Unani. These conventional therapies are an essential source of new anti‐infective drugs considering antimicrobial resistance threatens global public health. The present review critically appraises the use of medicinal plants against bacterial, viral, fungal and parasitic infections in combination with medicinal chemistry and ethnopharmacology. A comprehensive review of ethnobotanical data, phytochemistry and pharmacological studies was performed on the basis of WHO classification of infectious diseases in order to identify repeating medicinal plants and their active ingredients. Over 150 medicinal plants have been discovered by major ethnomedical systems in the course of history and have been used as the remedy of infectious diseases. Essential phytochemicals such as alkaloids, terpenoids, flavonoids, phenolics and saponins showed broad‐spectrum anti‐infective activity via mechanisms including membrane damage, enzyme inhibition, oxidative stress regulation and interference with nucleic acid synthesis. Some examples of such successful combination of ethnopharmacology with pharmacology include artemisinin, berberine, andrographolide and glycyrrhizin. Nevertheless, the lack of standardization, poor bioavailability and insufficient clinical trials are still problematic.
Keywords: antimicrobial resistance, communicable diseases, ethnopharmacology, medicinal chemistry, medicinal plants, phytochemicals
Traditional medicine–derived bioactive phytomolecules targeting communicable diseases.

Abbreviations
- 3D
three‐dimensional
- ADMET
absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion and toxicity
- AMR
antimicrobial resistance
- API
ayurvedic pharmacopoeia of India
- CNS
central nervous system
- COVID‐19
coronavirus disease 2019
- DNA
deoxyribonucleic acid
- EGCG
epigallocatechin‐3‐gallate
- GI
gastrointestinal
- HBV
hepatitis B virus
- HCV
hepatitis C virus
- HIV
human immunodeficiency virus
- HSV
herpes simplex virus
- IF
impact factor
- LD5₀
median lethal dose
- MDR
multidrug resistance
- MPNS
medicinal plant names services
- MT
medicinal therapy / multitarget (depending on usage context)
- PCP
pneumocystis pneumonia
- PCR
polymerase chain reaction
- PK
pharmacokinetics
- QSAR
quantitative structure–activity relationship
- ROS
reactive oxygen species
- SAR
structure–activity relationship
- SARS‐CoV‐2
severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2
- TCM
traditional Chinese medicine
- URTI
upper respiratory tract infection
- WFO
world flora online
- WHO
world health organization
1. Introduction
Globally, infectious diseases brought on by bacterial, viral, fungal and parasitic pathogens remain a major public health concern [1]. Despite substantial advancements in antimicrobial medication research, properly controlling infectious illnesses remains a challenge. Long‐term utility of many conventional pharmaceuticals has been diminished by the rising incidence of antimicrobial resistance, the limited effectiveness of current treatments in some infections, adverse drug reactions and treatment failures [2]. Scientific interest in supplemental and alternative therapeutic sources has increased as a result of these limitations. Medicinal herbs, which have long been essential in the treatment of infectious diseases, are still widely used in traditional medical systems such as Ayurveda, Traditional Chinese Medicine, Unani and other indigenous healthcare traditions [3]. Plant‐based treatments are frequently used to cure symptoms associated with communicable diseases, including fever, lung infections, gastrointestinal issues, skin infections and parasitic infestations [4]. Crucially, these conventional methods have often served as the foundation for the discovery of bioactive molecules with antibacterial, antiviral, anti‐parasitic and antifungal effects [5]. Natural products made from plants are recognized as a valuable source of chemically diverse bioactive chemicals. The structural diversity and complexity of phytochemicals set them apart from many synthetic substances and contribute to their biological relevance [6].
Numerous studies highlight how this kind of chemical diversity makes it possible to interact with a variety of biological targets, which could be helpful in addressing intricate pathways of infectious diseases. However, traditional use or initial biological activity alone cannot establish therapeutic efficacy, highlighting the need for thorough scientific validation. Figure 1 Although ethnopharmacology is a useful method for selecting therapeutic plants for further investigation, it needs to be combined with current pharmacological and phytochemical research [7]. Plant‐derived drugs show encouraging in vitro and in vivo action against infectious pathogens, their direct therapeutic translation is frequently limited [8]. Poor water solubility, limited oral bioavailability, chemical instability, phytochemical composition fluctuation and a lack of safety and toxicity data are common problems [9].
FIGURE 1.

Integrated framework linking ethnopharmacology, phytochemicals, mechanisms and drug development.
Medicinal chemistry provides crucial ways to get over these limitations by enabling the optimization of natural product leads [10]. The research covered in this analysis suggests that plant‐derived chemicals are better evaluated as lead structures than as surefire medicinal prospects. Semi‐synthetic modification, rational derivatization and structure‐activity relationship studies are frequently employed to improve potency, selectivity and pharmacokinetic properties. Several clinically relevant anti‐infective medicines generated from or inspired by natural products have been successfully developed thanks to such approaches [11]. Chemicals originating from plants have a variety of mechanisms of action against pathogens that cause communicable diseases [12]. These include altering host–pathogen interactions, modifying oxidative stress, disrupting microbial membranes, inhibiting essential enzymes and interfering with nucleic acid synthesis [13]. In this regard, the current work uses ethnopharmacological data and medicinal chemistry techniques to investigate plant‐based treatments for infectious disorders [14]. The review concentrates on bioactive compounds, their chemical properties, modes of action and lead optimization techniques rather than offering a comprehensive list of medicinal plants [15, 16]. A interdisciplinary strategy that combines developments in medicinal chemistry, pharmacology and pharmaceutical sciences with ethnopharmacological knowledge is needed to address these issues [17]. In this sense, the current study examines plant‐based remedies for infectious diseases by combining medicinal chemistry methods with ethnopharmacological data. Instead of providing an exhaustive list of medicinal plants, the review focuses on bioactive chemicals, their chemical characteristics, modes of action and lead optimization strategies [16]. This balanced perspective aims to emphasize both the potential and limitations of medicinal plants as sources of anti‐infective medications in order to support their logical appraisal and future development [18].
Standardized reporting and tracking of worldwide health trends are made possible by the WHO's classification of communicable diseases [19]. Comparing disease burden, identifying new zoonoses and prioritising diseases that can be prevented by vaccination are made easier by classifying infections by pathogen family [20]. Bacterial and viral diseases continue to be the most common causes of epidemic outbreaks worldwide, although fungal and parasitic illnesses continue to cause significant morbidity among immunocompromised and resource‐constrained individuals. Recent WHO research show that the death rate from vaccine‐preventable diseases has decreased, although vector‐borne parasitic infections and antibiotic resistance still present challenges or are resurfacing. Consequently, this comprehensive list provides a single point of reference for understanding the origins of infectious diseases, the affected organ systems and the current WHO framework for global health management. The disease classification in Table 1 forms the basis of the disease classification adopted in this paper and underscores the wide range of communicable diseases whose therapy has been documented in traditional medicinal practices. The spread of diseases into bacteria, virus, fungi and parasites groups shows the variety of pathogens against which herbal medicines have been studied in Ayurveda, Traditional Chinese Medicine and Unani medicine. It also helps in comparing the results of ethnopharmacology with those of modern pharmacology studies in terms of disease groups that have been extensively studied in modern science, including malaria, tuberculosis, viral respiratory infections, and gastrointestinal infections. Thus, Table 1 forms the basis for assessment of the ethnomedical importance of bioactive molecules from plant sources to be discussed in later parts of the paper [1, 21, 22].
TABLE 1.
List of communicable disease caused by bacteria, fungus, parasites, and virus.
| Category | Disease name | Causative agent | Pathogen family | Principal organ affected |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Bacterial diseases
|
Tuberculosis | Mycobacterium tuberculosis | Mycobacteriaceae | Lungs (pulmonary TB) |
| Leprosy (Hansen's disease) | Mycobacterium leprae | Mycobacteriaceae | Skin, peripheral nerves | |
| Cholera | Vibrio cholera | Vibrionaceae | Intestine (acute watery diarrhea) | |
| Typhoid & Paratyphoid fevers | Salmonella enterica, S. Typhi | Enterobacteriaceae | Intestine, systemic | |
| Plague | Yersinia pestis | Enterobacteriaceae | Lymph nodes, lungs | |
| Diphtheria | Corynebacterium diphtheriae | Corynebacteriaceae | Throat, heart | |
| Tetanus | Clostridium tetani | Clostridiaceae | Nervous system (spasms) | |
| Pertussis (Whooping cough) | Bordetella pertussis | Alcaligenaceae | Respiratory tract | |
| Meningococcal meningitis | Neisseria meningitidis | Neisseriaceae | Brain meninges | |
| Gonorrhea | Neisseria gonorrhoeae | Neisseriaceae | Genital tract | |
| Syphilis | Treponema pallidum | Spirochaetaceae | Genitals, skin, CNS | |
| Trachoma | Chlamydia trachomatis | Chlamydiaceae | Eye (conjunctiva, cornea) | |
| Q fever | Coxiella burnetii | Coxiellaceae | Lungs, liver | |
| Brucellosis | Brucella spp. | Brucellaceae | Liver, spleen | |
| Leptospirosis | Leptospira interrogans | Leptospiraceae | Kidneys, liver | |
|
Fungal diseases
|
Candidiasis | Candida albicans | Saccharomycetaceae | Mouth, vagina, bloodstream |
| Aspergillosis | Aspergillus fumigatus | Trichocomaceae | Lungs, sinuses | |
| Cryptococcosis | Cryptococcus neoformans | Tremellaceae | Brain, lungs | |
| Histoplasmosis | Histoplasma capsulatum | Ajellomycetaceae | Lungs, liver | |
| Blastomycosis | Blastomyces dermatitidis | Ajellomycetaceae | Lungs, skin | |
| Coccidioidomycosis | Coccidioides immitis | Onygenaceae | Lungs | |
| Pneumocystis pneumonia (PCP) | Pneumocystis jirovecii | Pneumocystidaceae | Lungs (especially in HIV/AIDS) | |
| Sporotrichosis | Sporothrix schenckii | Ophiostomataceae | Skin, lymphatics | |
| Dermatophytosis (Ringworm) | Trichophyton rubrum | Arthrodermataceae | Skin, nails | |
|
Parasitic diseases
|
Malaria | Plasmodium falciparum, vivax, ovale, malariae | Plasmodiidae | Blood, liver |
| Leishmaniasis (Visceral/Cutaneous) | Leishmania donovani, tropica | Trypanosomatidae | Skin, liver, spleen | |
| Trypanosomiasis (African sleeping sickness) | Trypanosoma brucei | Trypanosomatidae | CNS, blood | |
| Chagas disease | Trypanosoma cruzi | Trypanosomatidae | Heart, GI tract | |
| Schistosomiasis | Schistosoma haematobium, Mansoni, japonicum | Schistosomatidae | Urinary tract, intestines | |
| Filariasis (Lymphatic) | Wuchereria bancrofti | Onchocercidae | Lymphatic system | |
| Onchocerciasis (River blindness) | Onchocerca volvulus | Onchocercidae | Skin, eyes | |
| Ascariasis | Ascaris lumbricoides | Ascarididae | Intestine | |
| Hookworm disease | Ancylostoma duodenale | Ancylostomatidae | Intestine, blood | |
| Trichuriasis | Trichuris trichiura | Trichuridae | Colon | |
| Taeniasis/Cysticercosis | Taenia solium, saginata | Taeniidae | Intestine, muscle, brain | |
| Echinococcosis | Echinococcus granulosus | Taeniidae | Liver, lungs | |
| Amoebiasis | Entamoeba histolytica | Entamoebidae | Colon, liver | |
| Giardiasis | Giardia lamblia | Hexamitidae | Intestine | |
| Toxoplasmosis | Toxoplasma gondii | Sarcocystidae | Brain, eyes | |
| Cryptosporidiosis | Cryptosporidium parvum | Cryptosporidiidae | Intestine | |
| Trichomoniasis | Trichomonas vaginalis | Trichomonadidae | Genital tract | |
| Dracunculiasis | Dracunculus medinensis | Dracunculidae | Skin, subcutaneous tissue | |
| Fascioliasis | Fasciola hepatica | Fasciolidae | Liver | |
| Clonorchiasis | Clonorchis sinensis | Opisthorchiidae | Liver, bile ducts | |
|
Viral diseases
|
COVID‐19 | SARS‐CoV‐2 | Coronaviridae | Respiratory tract, systemic |
| Influenza (Seasonal) | Influenza A/B virus | Orthomyxoviridae | Respiratory tract | |
| Measles | Measles morbillivirus | Paramyxoviridae | Skin, respiratory system | |
| Mumps | Mumps orthorubulavirus | Paramyxoviridae | Salivary glands | |
| Rubella | Rubella virus | Matonaviridae | Skin, fetus (congenital defects) | |
| Hepatitis A | Hepatitis A virus | Picornaviridae | Liver | |
| Hepatitis B | Hepatitis B virus | Hepadnaviridae | Liver (cirrhosis, cancer) | |
| Hepatitis C | Hepatitis C virus | Flaviviridae | Liver | |
| HIV/AIDS | Human immunodeficiency virus 1/2 | Retroviridae | Immune system | |
| Dengue | Dengue virus | Flaviviridae | Blood vessels (hemorrhagic fever) | |
| Zika virus disease | Zika virus | Flaviviridae | Brain (microcephaly in fetus) | |
| Yellow fever | Yellow fever virus | Flaviviridae | Liver, vascular system | |
| Poliomyelitis | Poliovirus | Picornaviridae | CNS (motor neurons) | |
| Rabies | Rabies lyssavirus | Rhabdoviridae | Brain (encephalitis) | |
| Ebola virus disease | Ebolavirus | Filoviridae | Blood, liver | |
| Marburg virus disease | Marburg marburgvirus | Filoviridae | Blood, liver | |
| Lassa fever | Lassa mammarenavirus | Arenaviridae | Vascular system | |
| Human papillomavirus infection | Human papillomavirus (HPV) | Papillomaviridae | Skin, genitals (cancer risk) | |
| Smallpox (eradicated) | Variola virus | Poxviridae | Skin, systemic | |
| Monkeypox (Mpox) | Mpox virus | Poxviridae | Skin, lymph nodes |
2. Ethnopharmacological Foundations of Plant‐Based Anti‐Infective Therapy
An essential beginning point for the development of plant‐based therapeutic medicines is ethnopharmacology, which studies the traditional usage of medicinal plants within particular cultural and historical contexts [23]. Plant‐based remedies have long been used in traditional medical systems and indigenous healing practices to treat infectious disease symptoms as fever, inflammation, diarrhoea, respiratory distress and skin lesions. Figure 2 Numerous geographical areas and medical traditions, such as Ayurveda, Traditional Chinese Medicine, Unani and indigenous healthcare systems, have documented these practices Tables 2, 3, and 4. The potential of ethnopharmacological knowledge to direct the selection of therapeutic plants for additional scientific study is the main source of its usefulness. The presence of biologically active components may be shown by the repeated use of a specific plant species in several cultures or historical eras. knowledge on plant parts used, preparation techniques and administration routes is frequently documented in ethnobotanical surveys and old pharmacopoeias. This knowledge can help guide experimental design in contemporary pharmacological research. However, rather than being a confirmation of therapeutic efficacy, such traditional use should be seen as suggestive. Numerous studies highlight how ethnopharmacology has made a significant contribution to the discovery of chemicals derived from plants that have anti‐infective properties. By reducing the enormous botanical diversity to a manageable number of candidates for phytochemical and biological investigation, this method has historically aided in the discovery of significant medicinal medicines. In contemporary research, bioassay‐guided fractionation and molecular screening techniques are still used to enhance ethnopharmacological data. Ethnopharmacological evidence has limits despite its significance. It might be challenging to assign biological effects to individual components of traditional treatments because they are occasionally created as complex combinations. Significant variations in chemical composition and biological activity can also arise from variations in plant species, geographic origin, harvesting conditions and preparation techniques. These elements show how crucial consistency and repeatability are in converting ethnopharmacological findings into experimentally validated results. Importantly, ethnopharmacological use may not always suggest safety or efficacy. Some widely used herbs may be hazardous at certain quantities or interact with prescription drugs. Therefore, in order to establish scientific credibility, ethnopharmacological knowledge needs to be combined with phytochemical characterization, pharmacological evaluation and toxicological assessment. In the context of finding anti‐infective drugs, ethnopharmacology should be seen as a field that produces hypotheses rather than a definitive source of therapeutic validation [24]. When combined with medicinal chemistry and mechanistic research, ethnopharmacological expertise can greatly benefit in the identification of lead compounds produced from plants. By maintaining scientific integrity and minimizing the likelihood of overstated assertions, this integrated approach allows historical information to influence current research.
FIGURE 2.

Conceptual framework illustrating the integration of traditional knowledge, bioactive phytochemicals and medicinal chemistry approaches in developing plant‐based therapeutics against communicable diseases.
TABLE 2.
Ayurveda Medicinal plants a traditionally reported for the management of communicable diseases and their ethnopharmacological relevance.
| S. No. | Botanical name | Accepted name (WFO/MPNS) | Author citation | Family | Ayurvedic name | API category | Communicable disease | Ethnopharmacological use |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Abrus precatorius | Abrus precatorius | L. | Fabaceae | Gunja | Krimi‐ghna | Parasitic infection | Antimicrobial; used externally for lice, ringworm |
| 2 | Abutilon indicum | Abutilon indicum | (L.) Sweet | Malvaceae | Atibala | Shothahara | Fever, infection | Antipyretic, wound healing |
| 3 | Adhatoda vasica | Justicia adhatoda | L. | Acanthaceae | Vasaka | Swasahara | Cough, TB | Expectorant, bronchodilator; used for asthma, bronchitis |
| 4 | Aegle marmelos | Aegle marmelos | (L.) Corrêa | Rutaceae | Bilva | Atisara‐nashaka | Dysentery, fever | Antibacterial, antiamoebic; used for diarrhea and cholera |
| 5 | Aloe barbadensis | Aloe vera | (L.) Burm.f. | Asphodelaceae | Kumari | Vrana‐roghahara | Skin, wounds | Antifungal, wound healing, antiviral |
| 6 | Argyreia speciose | Argyreia speciosa | (L.f.) Sweet | Convolvulaceae | Vriddhadaru | Rasayana | Chronic infection | Immunostimulant |
| 7 | Asparagus racemosus | Asparagus racemosus | Willd. | Asparagaceae | Shatavari | Rasayana | Immunodeficiency | Immunostimulant; adjuvant in infection recovery |
| 8 | Bacopa monnieri | Bacopa monnieri | (L.) Wettst. | Plantaginaceae | Brahmi | Rasayana | Chronic infections | Immunomodulatory, antiviral |
| 9 | Boerhavia diffusa | Boerhavia diffusa | L. | Nyctaginaceae | Punarnava | Shothahara | Fever, edema | Antimicrobial, hepatoprotective; used in jaundice |
| 10 | Calotropis gigantea | Calotropis gigantea | (L.) Dryand. | Apocynaceae | Arka | Kustha‐ghna | Skin infections | Antibacterial, antifungal |
| 11 | Carum carvi | Carum carvi | L. | Apiaceae | Krishnajiraka | Deepaniya | GI infections | Antimicrobial, antispasmodic |
| 12 | Cassia alata | Senna alata | (L.) Roxb. | Fabaceae | Dadamari | Kustha‐ghna | Fungal infections | Antifungal; ringworm remedy |
| 13 | Centella asiatica | Centella asiatica | (L.) Urb. | Apiaceae | Mandukaparni | Rasayana | Wound infections | Antibacterial, wound‐healing; topical and oral use |
| 14 | Cinnamomum tamala | Cinnamomum tamala | (Buch.‐Ham.) T.Nees & Eberm. | Lauraceae | Tamalapatra | Krimi‐ghna | Cold, cough | Antimicrobial, anti‐inflammatory |
| 15 | Cissampelos pareira | Cissampelos pareira | L. | Menispermaceae | Patha | Jwara‐hara | Fever, malaria | Antipyretic, antimalarial |
| 16 | Cissus quadrangularis | Cissus quadrangularis | L. | Vitaceae | Asthisamhara | Shothahara | Inflammation, fever | Antibacterial, antioxidant; promotes healing |
| 17 | Citrus limon | Citrus limon | (L.) Osbeck | Rutaceae | Nimbuka | Deepaniya | Fever, sore throat | Antiseptic, antiviral |
| 18 | Citrus medica | Citrus medica | L. | Rutaceae | Matulunga | Deepaniya | Fever, cough | Antimicrobial, anti‐inflammatory |
| 19 | Clerodendrum serratum | Clerodendrum serratum | (L.) Moon | Lamiaceae | Bharangi | Swasahara | Cough, cold | Expectorant, antimicrobial; used for bronchitis |
| 20 | Coleus forskohlii | Plectranthus barbatus | Andrews | Lamiaceae | Pashanbheda | Mutrakrichha | Urinary infections | Antibacterial |
| 21 | Curcuma longa | Curcuma longa | L. | Zingiberaceae | Haridra | Kustha‐ghna | Skin, wound infections | Antibacterial, antifungal, wound‐healing; topical paste for ulcers |
| 22 | Curcuma zedoaria | Curcuma zedoaria | (Christm.) Roscoe | Zingiberaceae | Kachura | Kustha‐ghna | Skin infections | Antifungal, antiseptic |
| 23 | Cynodon dactylon | Cynodon dactylon | (L.) Pers. | Poaceae | Durva | Shothahara | Fever, wounds | Antipyretic, antiseptic |
| 24 | Desmodium gangeticum | Desmodium gangeticum | (L.) DC. | Fabaceae | Shalaparni | Jwara‐hara | Fever, infection | Antipyretic, tonic |
| 25 | Desmodium triflorum | Desmodium triflorum | (L.) DC. | Fabaceae | Tripatra | Jwara‐hara | Fever | Antipyretic |
| 26 | Elettaria cardamomum | Elettaria cardamomum | (L.) Maton | Zingiberaceae | Ela | Deepaniya | Respiratory infections | Antibacterial, expectorant |
| 27 | Embelia ribes | Embelia ribes | Burm.f. | Primulaceae | Vidanga | Krimi‐ghna | Intestinal worms | Anthelmintic, antibacterial; classical Krimighna drug |
| 28 | Ficus benghalensis | Ficus benghalensis | L. | Moraceae | Nyagrodha | Kustha‐ghna | Skin infections | Antibacterial, healing |
| 29 | Garcinia indica | Garcinia indica | (Thouars) Choisy | Clusiaceae | Kokam | Deepaniya | Fever, diarrhea | Antioxidant, antimicrobial |
| 30 | Gmelina arborea | Gmelina arborea | Roxb. | Lamiaceae | Gambhari | Jwara‐hara | Fever, viral infections | Antimicrobial, antioxidant |
| 31 | Hemidesmus indicus | Hemidesmus indicus | (L.) R.Br. | Apocynaceae | Anantamul | Rasayana | Fevers, skin infection | Antimicrobial, blood purifier |
| 32 | Holarrhena antidysenterica | Holarrhena antidysenterica | (L.) Wall. ex A.DC. | Apocynaceae | Kutaja | Atisara‐nashaka | Dysentery, diarrhea | Antibacterial, antiprotozoal; used in amoebiasis |
| 33 | Justicia adhatoda | Justicia adhatoda | L. | Acanthaceae | Vasaka | Swasahara | Bronchitis | Antitussive, expectorant |
| 34 | Justicia gendarussa | Justicia gendarussa | Burm.f. | Acanthaceae | Nilambari | Jwara‐hara | Fever, malaria | Antipyretic, anti‐inflammatory |
| 35 | Mangifera indica | Mangifera indica | L. | Anacardiaceae | Amra | Jwara‐hara | Fever, wound healing | Antibacterial, anti‐inflammatory |
| 36 | Melia azedarach | Melia azedarach | L. | Meliaceae | Bakain | Krimi‐ghna | Skin, intestinal infections | Antimicrobial, antiparasitic |
| 37 | Mentha piperita | Mentha × piperita | L. | Lamiaceae | Pudina | Deepaniya | Cold, cough | Antiviral, antiseptic |
| 38 | Moringa oleifera | Moringa oleifera | Lam. | Moringaceae | Shigru | Deepaniya | Bacterial, viral infections | Antimicrobial, antioxidant |
| 39 | Myristica fragrans | Myristica fragrans | Houtt. | Myristicaceae | Jatiphala | Deepaniya | Cough, cold | Antibacterial, expectorant |
| 40 | Nelumbo nucifera | Nelumbo nucifera | Gaertn. | Nelumbonaceae | Kamala | Jwara‐hara | Fever, infections | Antioxidant, antipyretic |
| 41 | Nyctanthes arbor‐tristis | Nyctanthes arbor‐tristis | L. | Oleaceae | Parijata | Jwara‐hara | Chronic fever, malaria | Antimalarial, febrifuge; used in Assam and Bengal for fevers |
| 42 | Ocimum sanctum | Ocimum tenuiflorum | L. | Lamiaceae | Tulasi | Swasahara | Cold, cough, flu | Antiviral, immunomodulatory; decoction used for influenza and bronchitis |
| 43 | Phyllanthus niruri | Phyllanthus niruri | L. | Phyllanthaceae | Bhumyamalaki | Yakrit‐vikara | Viral hepatitis | Antiviral (HBV), hepatoprotective; used in liver infections |
| 44 | Picrorhiza kurroa | Picrorhiza kurroa | Royle ex Benth. | Plantaginaceae | Katuki | Yakrit‐vikara | Fever, jaundice | Antimicrobial, hepatoprotective; used for malaria and hepatitis |
| 45 | Piper betle | Piper betle | L. | Piperaceae | Tambula | Krimi‐ghna | Oral, skin infections | Antifungal, antibacterial |
| 46 | Piper cubeba | Piper cubeba | L.f. | Piperaceae | Kababchini | Swasahara | Bronchitis | Antibacterial, expectorant |
| 47 | Plumbago zeylanica | Plumbago zeylanica | L. | Plumbaginaceae | Chitraka | Krimi‐ghna | Fever, infection | Antibacterial, stimulant; used in chronic fever |
| 48 | Rauvolfia serpentina | Rauvolfia serpentina | (L.) Benth. ex Kurz | Apocynaceae | Sarpagandha | Jwara‐hara | Fevers | Antipyretic, antibacterial |
| 49 | Ricinus communis | Ricinus communis | L. | Euphorbiaceae | Eranda | Shothahara | Fever, inflammation | Anti‐inflammatory, antipyretic |
| 50 | Saussurea lappa | Saussurea costus | (Falc.) Lipsch. | Asteraceae | Kushtha | Kustha‐ghna | Skin, inflammation | Antibacterial, antifungal; used in eczema and leprosy |
| 51 | Sida cordifolia | Sida cordifolia | L. | Malvaceae | Bala | Shothahara | Fever, inflammation | Antiviral, antipyretic |
| 52 | Solanum xanthocarpum | Solanum virginianum | L. | Solanaceae | Kantakari | Swasahara | Asthma, bronchitis | Antibacterial, bronchodilator; used for cough |
| 53 | Syzygium cumini | Syzygium cumini | (L.) Skeels | Myrtaceae | Jambu | Krimi‐ghna | Oral infections | Antibacterial, antioxidant |
| 54 | Tamarindus indica | Tamarindus indica | L. | Fabaceae | Amlika | Deepaniya | Diarrhea | Antibacterial, cooling |
| 55 | Tephrosia purpurea | Tephrosia purpurea | (L.) Pers. | Fabaceae | Sharapunkha | Kustha‐ghna | Liver disorders | Antimicrobial, hepatoprotective |
| 56 | Terminalia arjuna | Terminalia arjuna | (Roxb.) Wight & Arn. | Combretaceae | Arjuna | Rasayana | Fever, infections | Antioxidant, antimicrobial |
| 57 | Tinospora cordifolia | Tinospora cordifolia | (Willd.) Miers | Menispermaceae | Guduchi | Rasayana | Fevers, infections | Immunostimulant; used for dengue, malariaand chronic fevers |
| 58 | Tribulus terrestris | Tribulus terrestris | L. | Zygophyllaceae | Gokshura | Mutrakrichha | Urinary infections | Antimicrobial, anti‐inflammatory |
| 59 | Tridax procumbens | Tridax procumbens | L. | Asteraceae | Jayanti | Vrana‐roghahara | Wound infections | Antibacterial, wound‐healing |
| 60 | Uraria picta | Uraria picta | (Jacq.) DC. | Fabaceae | Prishniparni | Jwara‐hara | Fever, inflammation | Antipyretic, immunostimulant |
| 61 | Vetiveria zizanioides | Chrysopogon zizanioides | (L.) Roberty | Poaceae | Ushira | Jwara‐hara | Fever | Antipyretic, cooling; used for seasonal fevers |
| 62 | Wrightia tinctoria | Wrightia tinctoria | (Roxb.) R.Br. | Apocynaceae | Indra | Kustha‐ghna | Psoriasis, leprosy | Antifungal, antibacterial |
Plants listed in Table 2 are documented in authoritative Ayurvedic classical texts including Charaka Saṃhitā, Suśruta Saṃhitā, Aṣṭāṅga Hṛdayaand the Ayurvedic Pharmacopoeia of India, Government of India, Ministry of AYUSH. These texts record therapeutic uses for communicable.
TABLE 3.
Traditional Chinese medicinal plants ** traditionally reported for the management of communicable diseases and their ethnopharmacological relevance.
| S. No. | Botanical name | Accepted name (WFO/MPNS) | Author citation | Family | Chinese name (Pinyin) | API category | Communicable disease | Ethnopharmacological Use |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Lonicera japonica | Lonicera japonica | Thunb. | Caprifoliaceae | 金银花 (Jin Yin Hua) | TCM Herb | Viral URTIs, epidemic fever | Heat‐clearing, antiviral, antibacterial |
| 2 | Forsythia suspense | Forsythia suspensa | (Thunb.) Vahl | Oleaceae | 连翘 (Lian Qiao) | TCM Herb | Febrile infections | Detoxifying, antimicrobial |
| 3 | Scutellaria baicalensis | Scutellaria baicalensis | Georgi | Lamiaceae | 黄芩 (Huang Qin) | TCM Herb | Respiratory & GI infections | Antiviral, anti‐inflammatory |
| 4 | Isatis indigotica (root) | Isatis indigotica | Fortune ex Lindl. | Brassicaceae | 板蓝根 (Ban Lan Gen) | TCM Herb | Epidemic viral diseases | Antiviral, immune‐modulating |
| 5 | Isatis indigotica (leaf) | Isatis indigotica | Fortune ex Lindl. | Brassicaceae | 大青叶 (Da Qing Ye) | TCM Herb | Febrile viral infections | Heat‐clearing |
| 6 | Glycyrrhiza uralensis | Glycyrrhiza uralensis | Fisch. ex DC. | Fabaceae | 甘草 (Gan Cao) | TCM Herb | Cough, sore throat | Antimicrobial, harmonizing |
| 7 | Ephedra sinica | Ephedra sinica | Stapf | Ephedraceae | 麻黄 (Ma Huang) | TCM Herb | Influenza, cold syndromes | Diaphoretic, bronchodilator |
| 8 | Houttuynia cordata | Houttuynia cordata | Thunb. | Saururaceae | 鱼腥草 (Yu Xing Cao) | TCM Herb | Pneumonia, lung infections | Antiviral, antibacterial |
| 9 | Artemisia annua | Artemisia annua | L. | Asteraceae | 青蒿 (Qing Hao) | TCM Herb | Malarial & febrile diseases | Antipyretic |
| 10 | Coptis chinensis | Coptis chinensis | Franch. | Ranunculaceae | 黄连 (Huang Lian) | TCM Herb | Dysentery, GI infections | Strong antibacterial |
| 11 | Phellodendron amurense | Phellodendron amurense | Rupr. | Rutaceae | 黄柏 (Huang Bai) | TCM Herb | Damp‐heat infections | Antimicrobial |
| 12 | Gardenia jasminoides | Gardenia jasminoides | J.Ellis | Rubiaceae | 栀子 (Zhi Zi) | TCM Herb | Febrile inflammation | Anti‐inflammatory |
| 13 | Platycodon grandifloras | Platycodon grandiflorus | (Jacq.) A.DC. | Campanulaceae | 桔梗 (Jie Geng) | TCM Herb | Respiratory infections | Expectorant |
| 14 | Fritillaria cirrhosa | Fritillaria cirrhosa | D.Don | Liliaceae | 川贝母 (Chuan Bei Mu) | TCM Herb | Chronic cough | Antitussive |
| 15 | Pinellia ternate | Pinellia ternata | (Thunb.) Makino | Araceae | 半夏 (Ban Xia) | TCM Herb | Phlegm‐related infections | Expectorant |
| 16 | Bupleurum chinense | Bupleurum chinense | DC. | Apiaceae | 柴胡 (Chai Hu) | TCM Herb | Fever, chills | Antipyretic |
| 17 | Magnolia officinalis | Magnolia officinalis | Rehder & E.H.Wilson | Magnoliaceae | 厚朴 (Hou Po) | TCM Herb | GI infections | Anti‐inflammatory |
| 18 | Atractylodes lancea | Atractylodes lancea | (Thunb.) DC. | Asteraceae | 苍术 (Cang Zhu) | TCM Herb | Dampness‐related infections | Antimicrobial |
| 19 | Pueraria lobate | Pueraria lobata | (Willd.) Ohwi | Fabaceae | 葛根 (Ge Gen) | TCM Herb | Fever, diarrhea | Antipyretic |
| 20 | Patrinia scabiosifolia | Patrinia scabiosifolia | Fisch. ex Trevir. | Caprifoliaceae | 败酱草 (Bai Jiang Cao) | TCM Herb | Intestinal abscess | Antibacterial |
| 21 | Sophora flavescens | Sophora flavescens | Aiton | Fabaceae | 苦参 (Ku Shen) | TCM Herb | Parasitic & skin infections | Antimicrobial |
| 22 | Chrysanthemum indicum | Chrysanthemum indicum | L. | Asteraceae | 野菊花 (Ye Ju Hua) | TCM Herb | Respiratory infections | Anti‐inflammatory |
| 23 | Viola yedoensis | Viola yedoensis | Makino | Violaceae | 紫花地丁 (Zi Hua Di Ding) | TCM Herb | Abscess, infections | Detoxifying |
| 24 | Taraxacum mongolicum | Taraxacum mongolicum | Hand.‐Mazz. | Asteraceae | 蒲公英 (Pu Gong Ying) | TCM Herb | URTIs, mastitis | Antibacterial |
| 25 | Scrophularia ningpoensis | Scrophularia ningpoensis | Hemsl. | Scrophulariaceae | 玄参 (Xuan Shen) | TCM Herb | Throat infections | Anti‐inflammatory |
| 26 | Gentiana scabra | Gentiana scabra | Bunge | Gentianaceae | 龙胆草 (Long Dan Cao) | TCM Herb | Damp‐heat infections | Antimicrobial |
| 27 | Verbena officinalis | Verbena officinalis | L. | Verbenaceae | 马鞭草 (Ma Bian Cao) | TCM Herb | Fever, malaria | Antipyretic |
| 28 | Andrographis paniculata | Andrographis paniculata | (Burm.f.) Nees | Acanthaceae | 穿心莲 (Chuan Xin Lian) | TCM Herb | Viral URTIs | Antiviral |
| 29 | Lobelia chinensis | Lobelia chinensis | Lour. | Campanulaceae | 半边莲 (Ban Bian Lian) | TCM Herb | Skin infections | Antibacterial |
| 30 | Eupatorium fortune | Eupatorium fortunei | Turcz. | Asteraceae | 佩兰 (Pei Lan) | TCM Herb | Summer infections | Aromatic antimicrobial |
| 31 | Zingiber officinale | Zingiber officinale | Roscoe | Zingiberaceae | 生姜 (Sheng Jiang) | TCM Herb | Cold infections | Antimicrobial |
| 32 | Mentha haplocalyx | Mentha canadensis | L. | Lamiaceae | 薄荷 (Bo He) | TCM Herb | Cold & flu | Antiviral |
| 33 | Perilla frutescens | Perilla frutescens | (L.) Britton | Lamiaceae | 紫苏叶 (Zi Su Ye) | TCM Herb | Respiratory infections | Antimicrobial |
| 34 | Cinnamomum cassia | Cinnamomum cassia | (L.) J.Presl | Lauraceae | 桂枝 (Gui Zhi) | TCM Herb | Cold syndromes | Circulatory stimulant |
| 35 | Acorus tatarinowii | Acorus tatarinowii | Schott | Acoraceae | 石菖蒲 (Shi Chang Pu) | TCM Herb | Infection‐related delirium | Antimicrobial |
| 36 | Angelica dahurica | Angelica dahurica | (Hoffm.) Benth. & Hook.f. | Apiaceae | 白芷 (Bai Zhi) | TCM Herb | Sinus infections | Antibacterial |
| 37 | Schizonepeta tenuifolia | Nepeta tenuifolia | Benth. | Lamiaceae | 荆芥 (Jing Jie) | TCM Herb | Early infections | Diaphoretic |
| 38 | Elsholtzia ciliate | Elsholtzia ciliata | (Thunb.) Hyl. | Lamiaceae | 香薷 (Xiang Ru) | TCM Herb | Summer flu | Antipyretic |
| 39 | Lycopus lucidus | Lycopus lucidus | Turcz. ex Benth. | Lamiaceae | 泽兰 (Ze Lan) | TCM Herb | Febrile diseases | Antibacterial |
| 40 | Eclipta prostrata | Eclipta prostrata | (L.) L. | Asteraceae | 旱莲草 (Han Lian Cao) | TCM Herb | Viral fevers | Immunomodulatory |
| 41 | Sanguisorba officinalis | Sanguisorba officinalis | L. | Rosaceae | 地榆 (Di Yu) | TCM Herb | Dysentery | Antibacterial |
| 42 | Cirsium japonicum | Cirsium japonicum | DC. | Asteraceae | 大蓟 (Da Ji) | TCM Herb | Inflammatory infections | Anti‐inflammatory |
| 43 | Oldenlandia diffusa | Hedyotis diffusa | Willd. | Rubiaceae | 白花蛇舌草 (Bai Hua She She Cao) | TCM Herb | Viral & tumor‐related infections | Detoxifying |
| 44 | Lysimachia christinae | Lysimachia christinae | Hance | Primulaceae | 金钱草 (Jin Qian Cao) | TCM Herb | UTIs | Antimicrobial |
| 45 | Polygonum cuspidatum | Reynoutria japonica | Houtt. | Polygonaceae | 虎杖 (Hu Zhang) | TCM Herb | Viral infections | Antiviral |
| 46 | Hedyotis corymbosa | Hedyotis corymbosa | (L.) Lam. | Rubiaceae | 白花蛇草 | TCM Herb | Epidemic infections | Antimicrobial |
| 47 | Imperata cylindrical | Imperata cylindrica | (L.) Raeusch. | Poaceae | 白茅根 (Bai Mao Gen) | TCM Herb | Febrile bleeding | Heat‐clearing |
| 48 | Pogostemon cablin | Pogostemon cablin | (Blanco) Benth. | Lamiaceae | 广藿香 (Guang Huo Xiang) | TCM Herb | GI infections | Antimicrobial |
| 49 | Coix lacryma‐jobi | Coix lacryma‐jobi | L. | Poaceae | 薏苡仁 (Yi Yi Ren) | TCM Herb | Damp‐heat infections | Immune support |
Medicinal species listed in Table 3 are referenced in traditional Chinese medical formularies, including Shénnóng Běncǎo Jīng (Divine Farmer's Classic of Materia Medica), Běncǎo Gāngmù (Compendium of Materia Medica) by Li Shizhen and the Pharmacopoeia of the People's Republic of China. These authoritative sources describe applications of the listed herbs in febrile, respiratory, gastrointestinal, parasitic and epidemic infectious disorders (Wēn bìng, Shī rèand related categories).
TABLE 4.
Unani medicinal plants *** for communicable diseases.
| S. No. | Botanical Name | Accepted Name (WFO/MPNS) | Author Citation | Family | Unani Name | API Category | Communicable Disease | Ethnopharmacological Use |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Piper longum | Piper longum | L. | Piperaceae | Filfil Daraz | Unani Medicinal Plant | Cough, bronchitis, respiratory infections | Expectorant, antibacterial |
| 2 | Piper nigrum | Piper nigrum | L. | Piperaceae | Filfil Siyah | Unani Medicinal Plant | Respiratory & GI infections | Antimicrobial, stimulant |
| 3 | Zingiber officinale | Zingiber officinale | Roscoe | Zingiberaceae | Zanjabeel | Unani Medicinal Plant | Cold, flu, GI infections | Antiviral, anti‐inflammatory |
| 4 | Trachyspermum ammi | Trachyspermum ammi | (L.) Sprague | Apiaceae | Ajwain | Unani Medicinal Plant | GI & respiratory infections | Antibacterial, carminative |
| 5 | Allium sativum | Allium sativum | L. | Amaryllidaceae | Lehsun | Unani Medicinal Plant | Bacterial & viral infections | Broad‐spectrum antimicrobial |
| 6 | Nigella sativa | Nigella sativa | L. | Ranunculaceae | Kalonji | Unani Medicinal Plant | Respiratory, GI infections | Immunomodulatory, antibacterial |
| 7 | Cordia myxa | Cordia myxa | L. | Boraginaceae | Sapistan | Unani Medicinal Plant | Cough, sore throat, URTIs | Antitussive, antiviral |
| 8 | Ziziphus jujube | Ziziphus jujuba | Mill. | Rhamnaceae | Unnab | Unani Medicinal Plant | Influenza‐like illness | Immunonutritional, soothing |
| 9 | Cydonia oblonga | Cydonia oblonga | Mill. | Rosaceae | Behidana | Unani Medicinal Plant | Cold, flu, pharyngitis | Demulcent, anti‐inflammatory |
| 10 | Viola odorata | Viola odorata | L. | Violaceae | Banafsha | Unani Medicinal Plant | Bronchitis, fever | Expectorant, antipyretic |
| 11 | Matricaria chamomilla | Matricaria chamomilla | L. | Asteraceae | Babuna | Unani Medicinal Plant | Viral URTIs | Anti‐inflammatory, antimicrobial |
| 12 | Pistacia integerrima | Pistacia integerrima | J.L.Stewart ex Brandis | Anacardiaceae | Kakra Singhi | Unani Medicinal Plant | Bronchitis, pneumonia | Expectorant, antibacterial |
| 13 | Glycyrrhiza glabra | Glycyrrhiza glabra | L. | Fabaceae | Asl‐us‐Soos | Unani Medicinal Plant | Throat & respiratory infections | Antiviral, soothing |
| 14 | Acorus calamus | Acorus calamus | L. | Acoraceae | Bach | Unani Medicinal Plant | GI & respiratory infections | Antibacterial |
| 15 | Cyperus rotundus | Cyperus rotundus | L. | Cyperaceae | Nagarmotha | Unani Medicinal Plant | Dysentery, fever | Antimicrobial |
| 16 | Operculina turpethum | Operculina turpethum | (L.) Silva Manso | Convolvulaceae | Turbud | Unani Medicinal Plant | Bacterial infections | Antimicrobial, purgative |
| 17 | Curcuma longa | Curcuma longa | L. | Zingiberaceae | Haldi | Unani Medicinal Plant | Wound & skin infections | Antibacterial, anti‐inflammatory |
| 18 | Withania somnifera | Withania somnifera | (L.) Dunal | Solanaceae | Asgand | Unani Medicinal Plant | Recurrent infections | Immunomodulatory |
| 19 | Ocimum basilicum | Ocimum basilicum | L. | Lamiaceae | Rehan | Unani Medicinal Plant | Respiratory infections | Antimicrobial |
| 20 | Trigonella foenum‐graecum | Trigonella foenum‐graecum | L. | Fabaceae | Hulba | Unani Medicinal Plant | Respiratory & GI infections | Anti‐inflammatory |
| 21 | Cinnamomum verum | Cinnamomum verum | J.Presl | Lauraceae | Darchini | Unani Medicinal Plant | Cold, flu, GI infections | Antibacterial |
| 22 | Foeniculum vulgare | Foeniculum vulgare | Mill. | Apiaceae | Badiyan | Unani Medicinal Plant | GI infections | Antimicrobial, carminative |
| 23 | Cuminum cyminum | Cuminum cyminum | L. | Apiaceae | Zeera | Unani Medicinal Plant | Diarrhea, dysentery | Antibacterial |
| 24 | Ficus religiosa | Ficus religiosa | L. | Moraceae | Peepal | Unani Medicinal Plant | Throat & respiratory infections | Antimicrobial |
| 25 | Emblica officinalis | Phyllanthus emblica | L. | Phyllanthaceae | Amla | Unani Medicinal Plant | Viral & bacterial infections | Immunomodulatory |
| 26 | Psoralea corylifolia | Cullen corylifolium | (L.) Medik. | Fabaceae | Babchi | Unani Medicinal Plant | Skin infections | Antibacterial |
| 27 | Smilax china | Smilax china | L. | Smilacaceae | Chob‐e‐Chini | Unani Medicinal Plant | Chronic infections | Antimicrobial |
| 28 | Sphaeranthus indicus | Sphaeranthus indicus | L. | Asteraceae | Mundi | Unani Medicinal Plant | Fever & infections | Antipyretic |
| 29 | Ruta graveolens | Ruta graveolens | L. | Rutaceae | Suddab | Unani Medicinal Plant | Bacterial infections | Antimicrobial |
| 30 | Malva sylvestris | Malva sylvestris | L. | Malvaceae | Khubazi | Unani Medicinal Plant | Respiratory infections | Demulcent |
| 31 | Linum usitatissimum | Linum usitatissimum | L. | Linaceae | Alsi | Unani Medicinal Plant | Throat infections | Anti‐inflammatory |
| 32 | Hordeum vulgare | Hordeum vulgare | L. | Poaceae | Jau | Unani Medicinal Plant | Febrile illness | Cooling, nutritive |
| 33 | Plantago ovata | Plantago ovata | Forssk. | Plantaginaceae | Ispaghula | Unani Medicinal Plant | GI infections | Soothing |
| 34 | Cassia fistula | Cassia fistula | L. | Fabaceae | Amaltas | Unani Medicinal Plant | Intestinal infections | Mild antimicrobial |
| 35 | Azadirachta indica | Azadirachta indica | A.Juss. | Meliaceae | Neem | Unani Medicinal Plant | Skin & systemic infections | Broad antimicrobial |
| 36 | Berberis aristata | Berberis aristata | DC. | Berberidaceae | Rasaut | Unani Medicinal Plant | Eye & GI infections | Antibacterial |
| 37 | Terminalia chebula | Terminalia chebula | Retz. | Combretaceae | Halela | Unani Medicinal Plant | GI infections | Antimicrobial |
| 38 | Terminalia bellirica | Terminalia bellirica | (Gaertn.) Roxb. | Combretaceae | Balela | Unani Medicinal Plant | Respiratory & GI infections | Antibacterial |
| 39 | Rosa damascene | Rosa × damascena | Mill. | Rosaceae | Gulab | Unani Medicinal Plant | Throat & febrile illness | Anti‐inflammatory |
| 40 | Mentha arvensis | Mentha arvensis | L. | Lamiaceae | Podina | Unani Medicinal Plant | GI & respiratory infections | Antimicrobial |
| 41 | Syzygium aromaticum | Syzygium aromaticum | (L.) Merr. & L.M.Perry | Myrtaceae | Laung | Unani Medicinal Plant | Dental & throat infections | Antibacterial |
| 42 | Punica granatum | Punica granatum | L. | Lythraceae | Anar | Unani Medicinal Plant | Diarrhea, dysentery | Antimicrobial |
| 43 | Lawsonia inermis | Lawsonia inermis | L. | Lythraceae | Hina | Unani Medicinal Plant | Skin infections | Antifungal |
| 44 | Althaea officinalis | Althaea officinalis | L. | Malvaceae | Khatmi | Unani Medicinal Plant | Respiratory infections | Demulcent |
| 45 | Coriandrum sativum | Coriandrum sativum | L. | Apiaceae | Kishneez | Unani Medicinal Plant | GI infections | Antibacterial |
| 46 | Anethum graveolens | Anethum graveolens | L. | Apiaceae | Soya | Unani Medicinal Plant | Digestive infections | Antimicrobial |
| 47 | Morus alba | Morus alba | L. | Moraceae | Toot | Unani Medicinal Plant | Respiratory infections | Antibacterial |
| 48 | Eucalyptus globulus | Eucalyptus globulus | Labill. | Myrtaceae | Nilgiri | Unani Medicinal Plant | Respiratory infections | Antiseptic |
| 49 | Hibiscus rosa‐sinensis | Hibiscus rosa‐sinensis | L. | Malvaceae | Gudhal | Unani Medicinal Plant | Fever & infections | Anti‐inflammatory |
Plants included in Table 4 are recognized in established Unani literature and formularies such as Al‐Qānūn fī’l‐Ṭibb, Kitāb al‐Hāwī, Makhzan‐ul‐Advia and the National Formulary of Unani Medicine, Ministry of AYUSH, Government of India. These works describe therapeutic use of the listed botanicals in communicable diseases.
3. Major Classes of Plant‐Derived Bioactive Compounds
Medicinal plants produce a wide array of secondary metabolites that contribute to their reported biological activities [8]. These compounds are not directly involved in primary metabolic processes but play important ecological roles, such as defense against pathogens and environmental stress [9, 10]. Secondary metabolites originating from plants are a valuable source of chemically varied scaffolds that have been studied for their possible effectiveness against pathogens that cause communicable diseases [12]. Alkaloids, terpenoids, phenolic compounds, flavonoids and glycosides are the main types of phytochemicals that are frequently reported in anti‐infective research; each is distinguished by unique chemical characteristics and biological profiles [2, 25].
3.1. Alkaloids
Alkaloids are chemical substances that include nitrogen and frequently have strong biological effects [20]. They are found in many medicinal plants and have been well investigated for their antiviral, antibacterial and anti‐parasitic qualities [23]. From simple heterocyclic systems to complex polycyclic frameworks, alkaloids display a broad variety of structural diversity [3, 26]. Numerous alkaloids have been demonstrated to hinder the growth of microbes by mechanisms such as enzyme inhibition, disruption of nucleic acid synthesis and change of membrane function [25]. However, the same structural features that produce biological activity can also cause cytotoxicity, underscoring the significance of meticulous dose optimization and safety evaluation [20]. Alkaloids are often studied as lead compounds in medicinal chemistry; structural changes are used to improve selectivity and lower toxicity [26]. Alkaloids have become significant bioactive substances that can disrupt the molecular mechanisms necessary for viral survival and reproduction [4, 27]. Antiviral effect is mainly mediated by suppressing a number of crucial phases of the viral life cycle, such as transcription, protein synthesis and DNA and RNA replication [28]. Other processes reported in the literature include DNA intercalation, enzyme inhibition and disruption of ribonucleoprotein complex translocation, all of which contribute to impaired viral genome assembly and expression. Certain alkaloids have also been shown to alter the host's immune system by increasing humoral immune responses, which fortifies immunological defense and viral resistance in addition to these direct antiviral effects [29] Figure 3.
FIGURE 3.

Schematic representation of the antiviral effects of plant‐derived alkaloids.
3.2. Terpenoids
One of the biggest and most structurally varied groups of secondary metabolites found in plants are terpenoids [23]. These are made up of isoprene units that are biosynthesized into mono‐, sesqui‐, di‐and triterpenes [4, 5]. Terpenoids are found in many medicinal herbs that have long been used to treat infectious diseases. Terpenoids' ability to interact with biological membranes through lipophilia may account for some of their antibacterial or anti‐parasitic effects. Furthermore, certain terpenoid drugs have been found to target particular redox systems or enzymatic pathways in infections [6, 28]. Despite their intriguing biological activity, terpenoids cannot be directly utilized in medicine due to issues with solubility and metabolic stability. Medicinal chemistry methods, such as semi‐synthetic modification and formulation approaches, are often studied to get over these limitations [11].
Terpenoids, which include hemiterpenes, monoterpenes, sesquiterpenes, diterpenes, sesterterpenes, triterpenes and tetraterpenoids, are one of the most structurally varied classes of natural products [7, 8]. All plant parts contain these substances, which are produced by primary and secondary metabolism. However, they are most abundant in the leaves and fruits, where they contribute to ecological protection, aroma and color. Their wide antibacterial and antiviral characteristics have made them appealing scaffolds in medicinal chemistry due to their pharmacological relevance [18]. Notable examples include glycyrrhizin from Glycyrrhiza glabra, which is known for its antiviral, anti‐inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties against hepatitis and corona viruses and monoterpenes such as isoborneol, β‐pineneand limonene, which have strong action against the herpes simplex virus [30]. Triterpenoids like celastrol and carotenoid derivatives like fucoxanthin have also been demonstrated to inhibit the replication of dengue, HIV, hepatitis viruses and SARS‐CoV‐2 by disrupting viral polymerases and entry channels Figure 4 [31].
FIGURE 4.

Schematic representation of the antiviral effects of plant‐derived terpenoids.
3.3. Phenolic Compounds and Phenolic Acids
Plant metabolites with one or more hydroxylated aromatic rings are known as phenolic compounds. Tannins, phenolic acids, simple phenols and associated substances are all members of this class [6, 8]. In experiments, phenolics have shown antiviral, antifungal and antibacterial properties [25]. The capacity of phenolic compounds to interact with metal ions, proteins and enzymes is a widely accepted explanation for their biological effects [26]. These interactions may cause membrane instability, interfere with microbe adherence, or inhibit enzymes in microbial systems but the quick metabolism of phenolic compounds is another well‐known characteristic [27]. Therefore, rather than acting as direct therapeutic agents, their involvement in drug development is frequently concentrated on acting as pharmacophoric templates. Through a variety of mechanisms that interfere with the viral life cycle, phenolic substances demonstrate wide antiviral action [31]. They have the ability to weaken viral envelopes, prevent binding to receptors on host cells and stop vital viral enzymes and protein functions [32]. Among these, green tea's epigallocatechin‐3‐gallate has been demonstrated to inhibit HIV‐1 gp120 binding to CD4 receptors and limit influenza A virus replication through modification of the p38 MAPK–IFN‐λ2 pathway [8, 9]. Other phenolics, such sodium ferulate and chicoric acid, prevent nucleic acid production and integration by interfering with viral polymerases and integrases [33]. By inducing cytokines and chemokines, substances like gallic acid and salicylic acid activate host immunological defences while further impeding viral attachment, replication and intercellular transmission [34]. When used together, phenolic chemicals limit the spread of infection, improve host antiviral responses and prevent viral reproduction Figure 5.
FIGURE 5.

Schematically summarizes the anti‐infective mechanisms of plant‐derived flavonoids.
3.4. Flavonoids
A category of polyphenolic chemicals found in many therapeutic plants are flavonoids [35]. They are frequently mentioned in ethnopharmacological research concerning the management of inflammatory and infectious diseases [9, 36]. Flavonoids have a distinctive C6–C3–C6 backbone that permits a great deal of structural diversity through methylation, glycosylation and hydroxylation [37]. Flavonoids may have anti‐infective effects via a variety of mechanisms, including as interference with viral replication processes, modification of oxidative stress and inhibition of microbial enzymes [8, 9, 38]. Although flavonoids' multi target nature has drawn attention, it also makes exact target identification more difficult [38, 39]. Furthermore, low oral bioavailability continues to be a major obstacle, which has sparked interest in prodrug and chemical modification techniques Figure 6.
FIGURE 6.

Schematic representation of antiviral, antibacterial and immunomodulatory mechanisms of plant‐derived flavonoids.
3.5. Glycosides and Saponins
Glycosides are substances that have a sugar moiety attached to a non‐sugar aglycone [20]. The amphiphilic nature of saponins, a subclass of glycosides, enables them to interact with lipid membranes [9, 10]. These compounds are frequently present in medicinal plants that are used to treat infectious and inflammatory illnesses [23]. Saponins are said to increase membrane permeability and facilitate the absorption of other bioactive chemicals. On occasion, their immunomodulatory properties have also been investigated [25]. However, at higher doses, their membrane‐active behaviour might have cytotoxic or haemolytic effects. Medicinal chemistry efforts often focus on changing the sugar or aglycone components to improve safety and selectivity [11, 28].
3.6. Relevance to Anti‐Infective Drug Discovery
Relatively few plant‐derived drugs make it to clinical use without significant modification, despite the fact that many show encouraging biological activity in experimental settings [40, 41]. Regarding chemical stability, bioavailability, selectivity and safety, each class of phytochemicals has unique benefits and drawbacks [12, 29]. Understanding these characteristics is essential for the rational evaluation of plant‐based compounds as potential anti‐infective medications [42, 43]. Phytochemicals are no longer seen as finished medications in modern research, but rather as helpful starting points for lead discovery and optimization [13, 15]. Combining knowledge of ethnopharmacology with medicinal chemistry and mechanistic research offers a more balanced and scientifically rigorous approach to studying plant‐based remedies against infectious diseases Table 5 [44, 45, 46, 47, 48].
TABLE 5.
Isolated plant‐derived bioactive compounds reported with anti‐infective activity against communicable diseases.
| Compound | Plant source | Chemical class | Key chemical structure features | Communicable disease category | Mechanistic relevance | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Artemisinin | Artemisia annua |
Sesquiterpene lactone
|
Tricyclic sesquiterpene with endoperoxide bridge | Parasitic (malaria) | Endoperoxide cleavage → parasite oxidative stress |
[49] |
| Quinine | Cinchona spp. |
Quinoline alkaloid
|
Quinoline ring linked to quinuclidine moiety | Parasitic (malaria) | Inhibits heme detoxification | [50] |
| Berberine | Berberis spp. |
Isoquinoline alkaloid
|
Planar tetracyclic isoquinoline scaffold | Bacterial | DNA intercalation; enzyme inhibition |
[51] |
| Curcumin | Curcuma longa |
Polyphenolic diarylheptanoid
|
Two phenolic rings linked by α,β‐unsaturated diketone | Bacterial, viral | Enzyme inhibition; redox modulation |
[33] |
| Andrographolide | Andrographis paniculata |
Diterpenoid lactone
|
Bicyclic diterpene with lactone ring | Viral, bacterial | Interference with viral replication | [52] |
| Glycyrrhizin | Glycyrrhiza glabra |
Triterpenoid saponin
|
Oleanane‐type triterpene with sugar residues | Viral | Inhibits viral entry and replication | [34] |
| Quercetin | Multiple plants |
Flavonol
|
C6–C3–C6 flavonoid backbone with hydroxyl groups | Bacterial, viral | Enzyme inhibition; antioxidant activity | [36] |
| Baicalein | Scutellaria baicalensis |
Flavone
|
Trihydroxyflavone with planar aromatic rings | Viral | Inhibits viral proteases | [53] |
| Epigallocatechin gallate | Camellia sinensis |
Catechin
|
Polyhydroxylated flavanol with gallate ester | Viral, bacterial | Membrane interaction; enzyme inhibition | [54] |
| Allicin | Allium sativum |
Organosulfur compound
|
Thiosulfinate functional group | Bacterial, fungal | Reacts with thiol‐containing enzymes | [55] |
| Thymol | Thymus vulgaris |
Monoterpene phenol
|
Phenolic ring with isopropyl substituent | Bacterial, fungal | Disrupts membrane integrity | [56] |
| Carvacrol | Origanum spp. |
Monoterpene phenol
|
Isomer of thymol with phenolic OH | Bacterial | Alters membrane permeability | [57] |
| Sanguinarine | Sanguinaria Canadensis |
Benzophenanthridine alkaloid
|
Planar polycyclic aromatic system | Bacterial | DNA and enzyme interaction | [58] |
| Limonene | Citrus spp. |
Monoterpene
|
Cyclic monoterpene hydrocarbon | Fungal, bacterial | Membrane perturbation | [59] |
| Piperine | Piper nigrum |
Alkaloid
|
Piperidine ring linked to methylenedioxy phenyl | Bacterial | Efflux pump inhibition | [60] |
| Capsaicin | Capsicum spp. |
Vanilloid alkaloid
|
Vanillyl group linked to long alkyl chain | Bacterial | Membrane disruption; enzyme interference | [61] |
| Resveratrol | Polygonum cuspidatum |
Stilbene polyphenol
|
Two phenyl rings linked by ethylene bridge | Viral | Inhibits viral replication pathways | [62] |
| Luteolin | Ocimum, Celery |
Flavone
|
Tetrahydroxyflavone structure | Viral, bacterial | Enzyme inhibition; anti‐inflammatory modulation | [63] |
| Ellagic acid | Punica granatum |
Polyphenolic dilactone
|
Biphenyl with lactone rings | Viral | Protein binding; antioxidant activity | [64] |
| Tannic acid | Multiple plants |
Hydrolysable tannin
|
Polygallic acid esterified to glucose | Bacterial | Protein precipitation; enzyme inhibition | [65] |
The aforementioned substances are isolated, chemically characterized molecules produced from plants that have been shown to have anti‐infective properties in experimental studies. Although their inclusion in this table does not imply clinical efficacy or curative potential, their chemical structures offer mechanistic justification for biological activity. The majority of drugs need additional clinical validation, pharmacokinetic analysis and medicinal chemistry optimization.
4. Mechanistic Relevance of Isolated Plant‐Derived Bioactive Compounds Reported With Anti‐Infective Activity Against Communicable Diseases
Experimental and mechanistic research, rather than clinical evidence, is the main source of support for the anti‐infective potential of isolated plant‐derived bioactive chemicals Figure 7 [30, 66]. These substances have a variety of chemical scaffolds that interact through various metabolic routes with microbial or parasite systems [67]. Assessing translational potential and directing medicinal chemistry optimization require an understanding of their mechanistic significance [68, 69].
FIGURE 7.

Type of mechanistic relevance of isolated plant‐derived bioactive compounds.
5. Disruption of Pathogen Cellular Integrity
The membrane perturbing effect of natural plant extracts is greatly determined by their physiochemical properties, especially lipophility, molecular weight and functional group distribution [70, 71]. Phenolic monoterpenes like thymol and carvacrol have hydrophobic aromatic rings and hydrophilic hydroxyl functional groups, which allow them to penetrate the phospholipid membrane structure of the microorganisms. Once they enter the membrane structure, they cause changes in the fluidity and packing of lipids and increased ion permeability [72, 73]. Leakage of potassium ions, depletion of ATP and proton motive force has been shown experimentally to occur after treatment with these extracts [33]. These changes have a negative impact on metabolism and eventually cause cell death. Membrane alteration in fungal pathogens also disrupts the ergosterol‐dependent arrangement of membranes and hence increases sensitivity to these drugs [31, 39]. But since mammalian membranes have some structural similarities to microbial membranes, increased membrane activity can lower selectivity and cause cell toxicity [74]. As a result, medicinal chemists tend to develop compounds that optimize membrane binding and pathogen selectivity [53, 54].
5.1. Inhibition of Enzymatic Pathways Essential for Pathogen Survival
Among the most studied anti‐infective mechanisms of the phyto‐compounds is the inhibition of the enzymes necessary for the infection reproduction and development [54, 75]. This is possible only because of the capability of the phytochemicals to interact specifically with certain sites of the enzyme structure due to the hydrogen bonding, hydrophobic and π‐π‐stacking interactions and electrostatic interactions [76]. Such flavonoids as baicalein, quercetin, and luteolin inhibit various viruses' and bacteria's enzymes [38, 77]. Molecular docking and enzymatic assays demonstrated that these compounds interact with the amino acid residues responsible for catalysis of proteases, which leads to the inhibition of proteolytic processing of viral polyproteins and thus prevents virus reproduction [78]. In the case of coronavirus, flavonoids were found to be capable to interact with the catalytic site of 3CLpro and PLpro proteases which are important for viral maturation [79, 80]. Hydroxyl group of the flavonoid structure plays an important role in the interaction with catalytic residues through hydrogen bonding. Another example of such action is alkaloids [81]. Berberine is known to target the bacterial DNA gyrase and topoisomerase enzymes that play an important role in super‐coiling and replication of DNA. The planar nature of the cationic berberine molecule makes it possible for the drug to interact with negatively charged nucleic acid–protein complexes and inhibit bacterial growth [81, 82]. The polyphenolic molecules like EGCG inhibit viral polymerases, neuraminidases, and proteases by targeting multiple targets [82]. This implies that plant derived molecules may target highly specific molecular sites in addition to being generally antimicrobial.
5.2. Modulation of Oxidative Stress and Redox Balance
Numerous plant‐derived chemicals have been shown to have anti‐infective properties by regulating pathogens' oxidative stress [83]. In parasite‐specific settings, artemisinin, a sesquiterpene lactone containing an endoperoxide bridge, is activated to produce reactive oxygen species [49, 50]. Important parasite proteins and membranes are oxidatively damaged by these reactive intermediates. Redox signalling pathways are also impacted by polyphenolic substances like resveratrol and curcumin [84]. Despite their well‐established antioxidant qualities, experimental evidence indicates that they might cause oxidative imbalance in microbial systems, which would obliquely contribute to antimicrobial actions [85]. The modulation of oxidative stress is a complex mechanism since, in different biological systems, phytochemicals can act as either antioxidants or pro‐oxidants [86]. Artemisinin serves as an example of a redox‐activated anti‐infective compound. In malaria parasites, iron generated during the process of haemoglobin degradation reacts with the endoperoxide bridge of artemisinin and induces the formation of reactive oxygen species and carbon‐centered radicals [49]. These reactive molecules attack macromolecules, which leads to the death of the parasite. On the other hand, polyphenolic substances, such as curcumin, quercetin and resveratrol [87]. Although they are capable of scavenging ROS at physiological conditions, they might cause an imbalance in the redox status in microbes by interfering with redox balance and mitochondrial functions [88]. This might lead to disruption in ATP synthesis, enzyme functioning, and membrane stability. The link between redox modification and biofilm formation, virulence factors expression, which implies that oxidative strategies not only kill the pathogens but also affect their adaptability and persistence [70].
5.3. Interference With Nucleic Acid Function and Replication
It has been demonstrated that a variety of polyphenols and alkaloids exhibit activity through interactions with nucleic acids or processes associated with them [63, 65]. Sanguinarine and berberine can intercalate into DNA and disrupt transcription and replication due to their planar aromatic properties [37]. Although these techniques are effective against infections in vitro, they also necessitate a careful evaluation of host damage [89]. It has been demonstrated that compounds such as EGCG and baicalein restrict viral genome processing and decrease viral replication in viral systems by interfering with viral proteases or polymerases [40]. Nucleic acid synthesis interference is among the most straightforward approaches in the inhibition of pathogen reproduction by plant compounds [74]. Berberine and sanguinarine alkaloids share planar aromatic molecular configurations that facilitate intercalation into DNA bases. These effects lead to changes in DNA configuration, inhibit transcription activities and disrupt replication machinery. Apart from direct interactions with DNA, a few phytochemicals have been shown to block enzymatic reactions associated with the synthesis of nucleic acids such as DNA polymerase, reverse transcriptase and helicase [69]. The viral pathogens appear to be highly sensitive to these processes since their replication depends on the use of a small number of conserved enzymes. Polyphenolic EGCG, baicalein and some tannins exhibit inhibitory effects toward viral polymerases and replication complexes. By disrupting the formation of viral genomes, these substances are able to decrease viral loads and infection development [90]. However, owing to the similar pathway used by host cells, the selectivity of the inhibition becomes an important issue in lead optimization.
5.4. Modulation of Host–Pathogen Interactions
Certain bioactive substances originating from plants may affect host‐mediated pathways related to infection in addition to their direct antibacterial effect [70]. It has been observed that the triterpenoid saponin glycyrrhizin both modulates inflammatory responses and prevents viral entry and replication [18, 41]. Although conclusive therapeutic implications have not yet been proven, such dual action may help alleviate symptoms and lower the burden of pathogens [31, 77]. It is now increasingly clear that there are more than just direct antibacterial properties to the therapeutic actions of bioactive agents found in plants, and that immune modulation is often a key mechanism of action [34]. In the case of infection, hyperactivation of the inflammatory response is one of the main causes of tissue injury and disease development. For this reason, agents that can effectively inhibit the growth of pathogens as well as regulate the immune system might be considered highly advantageous in terms of treatment options. Glycyrrhizin, which is a triterpenoid saponin obtained from Glycyrrhiza glabra, has been shown to affect several host signaling pathways responsible for inflammation and the antiviral response [34]. Glycyrrhizin modulates NF‐κB signalling and reduces pro‐inflammatory cytokine production [91]. Flavonoids, including quercetin and luteolin, are known to influence MAPK and Nrf2 signaling pathways that regulate oxidative stress and inflammation [34, 91]. In addition to their mode of action based on pathogen destruction, these molecules might act by reducing tissue damage, regulating the immune response, and aiding recovery. On the other hand, excess immunomodulation will interfere with the protective immune reaction [92]. It is thus important to have an in‐depth knowledge of dose and pathway selectivity.
5.5. Multitarget Activity and Implications for Resistance
Compounds originating from plants frequently exhibit a multitarget mode of action. Numerous phytochemicals interact with several cellular pathways at once, in contrast to manufactured medicines that only target one [39, 42, 72]. This characteristic makes mechanistic interpretation and medicinal chemistry optimization more difficult, but it may also lessen the chance of rapid resistance development [43]. Multi‐target action should be well described from the standpoint of drug development in order to differentiate advantageous polypharmacology from nonspecific toxicity [44, 45].
5.5.1. Structure–Mechanism Relationships
Biological activity of natural bioactive compounds derived from plants is strongly linked with chemical structure because the smallest changes in the molecule can strongly affect interactions with biological targets, membrane permeability, stability of the molecule and its biological activity [45]. In case of flavonoids, presence and position of hydroxyl group are of particular importance for antimicrobial and antiviral activity of flavonoids because hydrogen bonds that can be formed between hydroxyl group of the compound and amino acid residues present in enzyme active site and viral protease provide strong interactions with target [93]. However, too much hydroxylation may decrease lipophilicity of the molecule and its ability to penetrate into cells. Methoxylation increases lipophilicity, which improves membrane permeability and metabolic stability of the molecule, but weakens interactions with biological targets. Planar structure of flavonoids and many alkaloids contributes to biological activity due to π‐π stacking with proteins and nucleic acids. For example, planar structure of berberine and sanguinarine provides interaction with nucleic acids [94]. The terpenoid compounds have an altogether distinct structure‐mechanism relation. The lipophilic nature of the hydrocarbon skeleton of terpenoids promotes their ability to distribute within biological membranes; hence, leading to the destabilization of the membranes, changes in permeability and pathogen imbalance. In like manner, the structural properties of the saponins due to the hydrophobicity of the aglycone part attached to the hydrophilic sugar units promote their interaction with membrane sterols and lead to membrane permeabilization [93, 94]. The pharmacokinetics of the compounds include aspects such as absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion. Knowledge of the structure‐mechanism relations is thus vital for medicinal chemistry purposes since modifications of the hydroxyl groups, aromatic substitutions, stereoselectivity and lipophilicity of the compounds can increase potency and minimize toxicity [94].
5.6. Translational Considerations
Although experimental data supports the mechanistic importance of isolated plant‐derived bioactive chemicals, it is crucial to note that the majority of the evidence is still preclinical [45, 46, 47, 48, 67, 95, 96, 97]. Variations in tissue distribution, metabolic stability and attainable concentrations can have a big impact on in vivo relevance. Therefore, rather than confirming therapeutic efficacy, molecular insights should be seen as a basis for lead optimization [44]. The aforementioned molecular pathways offer biological justification for observed anti‐infective efficacy and are developed from experimental research [85, 97].
6. Medicinal Chemistry Perspectives
The conversion of bioactive chemicals originating from plants into promising anti‐infective medication prospects is largely dependent on medicinal chemistry [41, 78]. Although many phytochemicals with documented activity against pathogens that cause communicable diseases have been found through ethnopharmacological and experimental research, the majority of these compounds do not have the best drug‐like qualities in their native forms [42, 79]. Medicinal chemistry techniques are therefore crucial for enhancing pharmacokinetic behavior, potency, selectivity and stability while reducing toxicity and adverse effects [43, 44] Figure 8.
FIGURE 8.

Various stages of the drug discovery process from natural products (1‐Plant collection, 2‐Extraction, 3‐Isolation and purification, 4‐Bioassays, 5‐Structural characterization, 6‐Lead optimization).
6.1. Natural Products as Lead Structures Rather Than Finished Drugs
Rather than being final therapeutic agents, plant‐derived compounds are increasingly recognized as lead structures [44, 48]. Although their varied and intricate chemical frameworks offer useful beginning points for drug discovery, they frequently don't meet standard drug‐likeness standards like solubility, permeability and metabolic stability [67]. This paradigm has historically produced a number of potent anti‐infective drugs by structural simplification or semi‐synthetic alteration, proving that medicinal chemistry concepts can be used to optimize natural products [95]. Eliminating compounds that do not fit into the traditional chemical space is less important in modern medicinal chemistry than understanding which structural features are crucial for biological activity and which contribute to undesirable attributes [46]. This distinction preserves pharmacological importance while allowing for logical correction [96].
6.2. Structure‐Activity Relationship Considerations
Studies of structure‐activity relationships are essential for improving chemicals obtained from plants [97]. Biological activity and selectivity can be significantly impacted by small modifications to functional groups, stereochemistry, or ring substitution patterns [47]. For instance, changes to alkaloid nitrogen atoms can change target affinity and toxicity profiles, whereas flavonoid hydroxylation patterns are known to impact enzyme binding and antioxidant activity [48]. The multitarget nature of phytochemicals frequently makes SAR analysis more difficult [67]. Target specificity and dose optimization are challenged, even though this may provide therapeutic benefits in complex infectious illnesses. Because of this, efforts in medicinal chemistry usually try to strike a balance between enhanced selectivity and multitarget activity [95].
Structure–activity relationship studies help immensely in understanding how to optimize anti‐infective drugs obtained from plants. For instance, in case of flavonoids, presence of more numbers of hydroxyl groups influences the biological activity [95]. The addition of hydroxyl groups at C‐3 and C‐5 of quercetin helps increase hydrogen bonding with the viral protease or bacteria enzymes; however, too many hydroxyl groups decrease membrane permeability. Methylation of hydroxyl group of flavonoids improves lipophilicity and penetration into cells but reduces binding affinity towards the targets. In case of baicalein and similar flavones, the presence of trihydroxyl groups at positions 5, 6 and 7 increases the inhibition of viral proteases. Moreover, the modification of berberine at C‐9 improves antimicrobial activity and DNA binding specificity [96].
6.3. Optimization of Pharmacokinetic Properties
Poor pharmacokinetic performance is a significant drawback of many bioactive chemicals originating from plants. Low oral bioavailability, fast metabolism, restricted membrane permeability and low water solubility are common problems [95]. Reduction of molecular flexibility, prodrug design and functional group modification is medicinal chemistry approaches to these problems [96].
6.4. Semi‐Synthetic Derivatization and Molecular Simplification
One of the most effective methods for enhancing plant‐derived anti‐infective drugs is still semi‐synthetic modification [97]. Medicinal chemists can improve drug‐like characteristics while maintaining important pharmacophores by carefully altering functional groups or streamlining intricate scaffolds [85]. For extremely complicated natural compounds that are challenging to synthesize or scale, molecular simplification is especially helpful. Simplified equivalents could provide better manufacturing and consistency while maintaining biological activity, which is crucial for clinical development [98].
6.5. Addressing Toxicity and Selectivity
A major consideration in the creation of chemicals derived from plants is toxicity. Cytotoxicity may also result from structural characteristics that provide antibacterial activity, such as DNA intercalation or membrane‐disruptive qualities [98]. By increasing pathogen selectivity and decreasing interactions with host targets, medicinal chemistry optimization seeks to improve therapeutic indices [99, 100]. Reducing late‐stage failures and guiding structural refinement can be achieved through the early integration of predictive computational methods and toxicity screening [78].
6.6. Multitarget Activity and Resistance Considerations
Numerous phytochemicals' multitarget activity has been suggested as a possible benefit in the fight against antibiotic resistance [101, 102]. These substances may lessen the chance of resistance development by concurrently altering several biological pathways [100]. However, multitarget behavior needs to be precisely described from the standpoint of medicinal chemistry in order to prevent unwanted pharmacological consequences. An emerging technique to improve efficacy while reducing resistance is the rational mixing of plant‐derived scaffolds with known pharmacophores or current medications [78]. To guarantee compatibility and safety, such methods need to be carefully optimized [103].
6.7. Translational Challenges and Future Directions
The conversion of plant‐derived molecules into clinically authorized anti‐infective medicines is still limited, despite advancements in medicinal chemistry [79]. Chemical complexity, natural source diversity and mechanistic knowledge gaps are among the difficulties [80].
Medicinal chemistry, pharmacology, computational modelling and standardized phytochemical supply will all need to be combined in order to address these problems [104].
7. Safety, Toxicity, and Pharmacokinetics
Safety, toxicity and pharmacokinetic behavior must be carefully assessed when developing bioactive molecules derived from plants as anti‐infective medicines [105]. Many phytochemicals can show dose‐dependent toxicity, restricted selectivity or unfavorable pharmacokinetic profiles, despite the fact that medicinal plants are typically thought to be intrinsically harmless due to their traditional use [103, 106]. As a result, medicinal chemistry optimization and translational success depend heavily on safety and pharmacokinetic factors [102].
7.1. Safety Considerations and Dose‐Dependent Toxicity
A limited therapeutic window is exhibited by a number of drugs produced from plants, especially when their actions entail membrane disruption or contact with nucleic acids [101]. Because of its planar shape and capacity to intercalate DNA, the isoquinoline alkaloid berberine, for instance, has been linked to lethal effects at higher concentrations despite exhibiting antibacterial activity [103]. In order to increase selectivity toward bacterial targets while lowering host toxicity, medicinal chemistry efforts have thus concentrated on structural modification. Similar to this, the benzophenanthridine alkaloid sanguinarine has demonstrated antibacterial activity in vitro, but it also interacts with cellular proteins and nucleic acids, which raises safety concerns [102].
7.2. Pharmacokinetic Limitations of Plant‐Derived Compounds
Poor pharmacokinetic performance is a recurring issue in the development of anti‐infective medications derived from plants [103]. Many phytochemicals have weak water solubility, rapid metabolism and limited oral absorption [107]. For example, curcumin has a very poor systemic bioavailability due to its restricted solubility and quick first‐pass metabolism [108]. With differing degrees of success, medicinal chemistry techniques like conjugation, structural modification and prodrug design have been investigated to improve its pharmacokinetic characteristics [109]. Due to its quick metabolism through glucuronidation and sulfation, quercetin and similar flavonoids have little exposure to the parent molecule in plasma [110].
7.3. Semi‐Synthetic Derivatives and Pharmacokinetic Improvement
Artemisinin is among the most effective instances of pharmacokinetic optimization of a substance obtained from plants [111]. Sustained therapeutic exposure is limited by the parent compound's comparatively short plasma half‐life. Artesunate and artemether are examples of semi‐synthetic derivatives that were created to improve pharmacokinetic behavior and solubility, greatly increasing therapeutic value [19]. This example shows how the inherent limits of natural goods can be overcome by medicinal chemistry [112].
7.4. Herb–Drug Interactions and Metabolic Considerations
Herb‐drug interactions could result from plant‐derived chemicals interacting with drug‐metabolizing enzymes and transporters [74, 108]. For instance, piperine has been shown to affect drug metabolism by modifying efflux transporters and cytochrome P450 enzymes [113]. These characteristics raise questions about unanticipated pharmacokinetic interactions even if they may increase the bioavailability of medications taken together [110]. Comprehending these interactions is crucial, especially when drugs derived from plants are being evaluated as lead structures for future research or adjuvant medicines [89].
8. Limitations and Future Perspectives
8.1. Limitations
Despite a plethora of ethnopharmacological knowledge and growing experimental evidence, several obstacles remain in the way of turning plant‐based remedies into clinically effective anti‐infective medications [89, 114]. One major drawback is the use of preclinical and in vitro research, which typically falls short in forecasting in vivo safety or efficacy in humans [115]. While many plant‐based bioactive compounds exhibit promising antibacterial activity in laboratory conditions, they may not always exhibit therapeutic effects in complex biological systems [93, 116].Another significant limitation is the biological and chemical variety of plant materials. Significant differences in phytochemical composition resulting from species, geographic origin, growing conditions and extraction methods might make reproducibility and standardization challenging [35, 117, 118]. Many phytochemicals have less‐than‐ideal drug‐like characteristics from the standpoint of medicinal chemistry, such as poor solubility, low bioavailability, quick metabolism and restricted target selectivity [119]. Furthermore, some substances have structural characteristics linked to cytotoxicity, such DNA intercalation or membrane rupture, which limit their therapeutic window. These problems emphasize the necessity of early safety evaluation and the significance of interpreting potency data cautiously [120]. Additionally, mechanistic knowledge of many chemicals originating from plants is still lacking. Although multitarget action may be advantageous, it makes target validation and dose optimization more difficult [121]. Moreover, medicinal chemistry optimization is slowed and rational structure‐based drug design is hampered by the absence of well‐defined molecular targets [32].
9. Conclusion
In the worldwide hunt for new anti‐infective drugs, plant‐based treatments remain a vital resource. Numerous bioactive compounds with broad‐spectrum antibacterial, antiviral, anti‐fungal and anti‐parasitic properties have been produced by the ethnopharmacological legacy of systems like Ayurveda, Traditional Chinese Medicine and Unani. These conventional ideas offer a reasonable framework for locating and improving plant‐derived molecules with therapeutically relevant potential when paired with developments in medicinal chemistry and pharmacological evaluation. Nevertheless, there has been little conversion of these discoveries into authorized treatments, despite considerable preclinical promise. Poor bioavailabilities, structural complexity and a dearth of standardized pharmacokinetic and toxicological data are major obstacles. Future studies should focus on combining ethnopharmacological data with pharmacokinetic profiling, in silico modelling and medicinal chemistry optimization in order to close this gap. This approach can improve selectivity, potency and safety while maintaining the overall advantages of natural products by expediting lead identification and optimization procedures. Multi‐omics and network pharmacology techniques should be applied to better understand the complex, multitarget interactions of phytochemicals within host‐pathogen systems. To ensure regulatory approval and reproducibility, standardized extraction techniques and comprehensive clinical validation would also be required. The collaboration of ethnobotanists, chemists, pharmacologists and computational biologists will ultimately determine whether or not the next generation of antimicrobial medications can successfully emerge from traditional medicinal knowledge.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization writing work by Manish Pathak, Supervision by Akanchha dwivedi & Sokindra Kumar, Garima verma & Vivek Pal. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This review work received no external funding.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Ethics Statement
Not applicable
Use of Generative AI and AI‐Assisted Technologies in the Writing Process
During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used ChatGPT for language refinement, grammar correction. After its use, the author(s) thoroughly reviewed, verified and revised all AI‐assisted content to ensure accuracy and originality. The author(s) take full responsibility for the integrity and final content of the published article.
Acknowledgments
All authors are thankful to faculty of pharmacy, Swami Vivekananad Subharti University, Meerut India for providing all necessary support.
Biographies
Dr. Manish Pathak is a Professor in the Faculty of Pharmacy at Swami Vivekanand Subharti University, Meerut, India. His research interests include natural product chemistry, ethnopharmacology, phytochemical profiling, and the development of plant‐based therapeutics for inflammatory and chronic diseases.

Ms. Akanchha dwivedi is a Research Scholar at Bhilai Mahila Mahavidyalaya, Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur, India. Her research focuses on medicinal plants, phytochemistry, traditional medicine systems, and their pharmacological evaluation in inflammatory disorders.

Dr. Sokindra Kumar is a faculty member in the field of Pharmacy with research interests in pharmacology, herbal drug technology, and evaluation of medicinal plants for antimicrobial and anti‐inflammatory activities. He is actively involved in research on natural products and traditional medicine.

Dr. Garima Verma is Associate Professor in the Professor in the Faculty of Pharmacy at Swami Vivekanand Subharti University, Meerut, India. Her research interests include Pharmaceutics, spectral interpretation, drug characterization techniques and quality assurance of herbal pharmaceutical formulations.

Mr. Vivek Pal is a Associate Professor in the Smt. Vidyawati College of Pharmacy, AKT University, Lucknow, India. His research interests include Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Phytochemistry, Natural Product and quality assurance of herbal pharmaceutical formulations.

Data Availability Statement
Data has been made available for other Reseachers availability.
References
- 1. World Health Organization . Global Health Observatory (GHO) Data Repository. (World Health Organization, 2024), https://www.who.int/data/gho. Accessed July 2026. [Google Scholar]
- 2. Fabricant D. S. and Farnsworth N. R., “The Value of Plants Used in Traditional Medicine for Drug Discovery,” Environmental Health Perspectives 109, no. Suppl 1 (2001): 69–75, 10.1289/ehp.01109s169. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Heinrich M., Ankli A., Frei B., Weimann C., and Sticher O., “Medicinal Plants in Mexico: Healers' Consensus and Cultural Importance,” Social Science & Medicine 47, no. 11 (1998): 1859–1871, 10.1016/S0277-9536(98)00181-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Gurib‐Fakim A., “Medicinal Plants: Traditions of Yesterday and Drugs of Tomorrow,” Molecular Aspects of Medicine 27, no. 1 (2006): 1–93, 10.1016/j.mam.2005.07.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Patwardhan B., Warude D., Pushpangadan P., and Bhatt N., “Ayurveda and Traditional Chinese Medicine: A Comparative Overview,” Evidence‐Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine 2, no. 4 (2005): 465–473, 10.1093/ecam/neh140. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Cox P. A. and Balick M. J., “The Ethnobotanical Approach to Drug Discovery,” Scientific American 270, no. 6 (1994): 82–87, 10.1038/scientificamerican0694-82. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Hamilton A. C., “Medicinal Plants, Conservation and Livelihoods,” Biodiversity & Conservation 13 (2004): 1477–1517, 10.1023/B:BIOC.0000021333.23413.42. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 8. van Wyk B. E. and Wink M., Medicinal Plants of the World, 2nd ed. (Briza Publications, 2017). [Google Scholar]
- 9. WHO WHO Traditional Medicine Strategy, 2014–2023 (World Health Organization, 2013). [Google Scholar]
- 10. Balunas M. J. and Kinghorn A. D., “Drug Discovery From Medicinal Plants,” Life Sciences 78, no. 5 (2005): 431–441, 10.1016/j.lfs.2005.09.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Jachak S. M. and Saklani A., “Challenges and Opportunities in Drug Discovery From Plants,” Current Science 92, no. 9 (2007): 1251–1257. [Google Scholar]
- 12. Cowan M. M., “Plant Products as Antimicrobial Agents,” Clinical Microbiology Reviews 12, no. 4 (1999): 564–582, 10.1128/CMR.12.4.564. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Silva N. C. C. and Fernandes A. Jr, “Biological Properties of Medicinal Plants: A Review of Their Antimicrobial Activity,” Journal of Venomous Animals and Toxins including Tropical Diseases 16, no. 3 (2010): 402–413, 10.1590/S1678-91992010000300006. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Chinsembu K. C., “Plants as Antimalarial Agents in Sub‐Saharan Africa,” Acta Tropica 152 (2015): 32–48, 10.1016/j.actatropica.2015.08.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Tu Y., “The Discovery of Artemisinin (Qinghaosu) and Gifts From Chinese Medicine,” Nature Medicine 17, no. 10 (2011): 1217–1220, 10.1038/nm.2471. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Gupta S. C., Patchva S., and Aggarwal B. B., “Therapeutic Roles of Curcumin: Lessons Learned From Clinical Trials,” AAPS Journal 15, no. 1 (2013): 195–218, 10.1208/s12248-012-9432-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Yin J., Qin S., Chen J., Wong N., Peng C., and Li D., “Berberine‐Based Strategies: Novel Delivery Systems Bring Out New Potential for Wound Healing,” Chinese Medicine 1, no. 20 (2025): 150, 10.1186/s13020-025-01192-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Fiore C., Eisenhut M., Krausse R., et al., “Antiviral Effects of Glycyrrhiza Species,” Phytotherapy Research 22, no. 2 (2008): 141–148, 10.1002/ptr.2295. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Mishra K., Dash A. P., Swain B. K., and Dey N., “Anti‐malarial Activities of Andrographis Paniculata and Hedyotis Corymbosa Extracts and Their Combination With Curcumin,” Malaria Journal 8 (2009): 26, 10.1186/1475-2875-8-26. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Rates S. M. K., “Plants as Source of Drugs,” Toxicon 39, no. 5 (2001): 603–613, 10.1016/S0041-0101(00)00154-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. World Health Organization . Communicable diseases. (World Health Organization, 2024), https://www.who.int. Accessed July 2026. [Google Scholar]
- 22. World Health Organization . Infectious Diseases Classification Framework. (World Health Organization, 2024), https://www.who.int. Accessed July 2026. [Google Scholar]
- 23. Salehi B., Sharifi‐Rad J., et al., “Phytochemicals in Drug Discovery Against Infectious Diseases: A Review,” Microorganisms 8, no. 5 (2020): 779.32455864 [Google Scholar]
- 24. Pandey A. K., Kumar P., Singh P., Tripathi N. N., and Bajpai V. K., “Essential Oils: Sources of Antimicrobials and Food Preservatives,” Frontiers in Microbiology 7 (2017): 2161, 10.3389/fmicb.2016.02161. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Twaij B. M. and Hasan M. N., “Bioactive Secondary Metabolites From Plant Sources: Types, Synthesis, and Their Therapeutic Uses,” International Journal of Plant Biology 13, no. 1 (2022): 4–14, 10.3390/ijpb13010003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Jamwal K. and Bhattacharya S., “Plant Growth Regulator Mediated Consequences of Secondary Metabolites in Medicinal Plants,” Journal of Applied Research on Medicinal and Aromatic Plants 9 (2018): 26–38. [Google Scholar]
- 27. Orhan D. D., Özçelik B., Özgen S., and Ergun F., “Antibacterial, Antifungal, and Antiviral Activities of Some Flavonoids,” Microbiological Research 165, no. 6 (2010): 496–504, 10.1016/j.micres.2009.09.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Ríos J. L. and Recio M. C., “Medicinal Plants and Antimicrobial Activity,” Journal of Ethnopharmacology 100, no. 1–2 (2005): 80–84. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Khan I., Nisar M., Ebad F., et al., “Antimicrobial Activity of Alkaloids and Terpenoids Isolated From Medicinal Plants,” Fitoterapia 80 (2009): 183–187. [Google Scholar]
- 30. Jassim S. A. A. and Naji M. A., “Novel Antiviral Agents: A Medicinal Plant Perspective,” Journal of Applied Microbiology 95, no. 3 (2003): 412–427, 10.1046/j.1365-2672.2003.02026.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Farooq U., Sharma V., and Arora R., “Role of Flavonoids in Combating Viral Infections,” Microbial Pathogenesis 174 (2022): 105860. [Google Scholar]
- 32. Huang Q. R., Zhang S. J., and Yang L., “Antiviral Activities of Triterpenoid Saponins,” Phytochemistry Reviews 17, no. 3 (2018): 561–574. [Google Scholar]
- 33. Moghadamtousi S. Z., Kadir H. A., Hassandarvish P., Tajik H., Abubakar S., and Zandi K., “A Review on Antibacterial, Antiviral, and Antifungal Activity of Curcumin,” BioMed Research International 2014 (2014): 186864. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34. Gahlot K. D., “Glycyrrhizin (GLY) and Glycyrrhetinic Acid (GA) as Potential Multi‐Target Antimicrobials: Mechanisms, Biofilm Disruption, and Synergy Against Drug‐Resistant Pathogens,” Frontiers in Microbiology 17 (2026): 1861692, 10.3389/fmicb.2026.1861692. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35. Rice‐Evans C. A., Miller N. J., and Paganga G., “Structure‐Antioxidant Activity Relationships of Flavonoids and Phenolic Acids,” Free Radical Biology and Medicine 20, no. 7 (1996): 933–956, 10.1016/0891-5849(95)02227-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36. Kumar S. and Pandey A. K., “Chemistry and Biological Activities of Flavonoids: An Overview,” Scientific World Journal 2013 (2013): 162750, 10.1155/2013/162750. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37. Yang L., Wen K. S., Ruan X., Zhao Y. X., Wei F., and Wang Q., “Response of Plant Secondary Metabolites to Environmental Factors,” Molecules 23, no. 4 (2018): 762, 10.3390/molecules23040762. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38. Kumar A., Rawat R., Kumar V., Dahiya S., Kumar S., and Kumar V., “An Overview of Pharmacological Profile of Flavonoids as Potential Molecules of Therapeutic Importance,” Current Drug Therapy 20, no. 9 (2025. ): 1205–1230, 10.2174/0115748855315504240917112850. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 39. Kaur G., Hamid H., Ali A., Alam M. S., and Athar M., “Antioxidant and Anti‐Inflammatory Activities of Phenolic Compounds From Medicinal Herbs,” Research Journal of Medicinal Plant 5, no. 6 (2011): 587–601. [Google Scholar]
- 40. Samy R. P. and Gopalakrishnakone P., “Therapeutic Potential of Plants as Anti‐Microbials for Drug Discovery,” Evidence‐Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine 7, no. 3 (2010): 283–294, 10.1093/ecam/nen036. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41. Newman D. J. and Cragg G. M., “Natural Products as Sources of New Drugs Over the Nearly Four Decades From 01/1981 to 09/2019,” Journal of Natural Products 83, no. 3 (2020): 770–803, 10.1021/acs.jnatprod.9b01285. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42. Clardy J. and Walsh C. T., “Lessons From Natural Molecules,” Nature 432, no. 7019 (2004): 829–837, 10.1038/nature03194. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43. Koehn F. E. and Carter G. T., “The Evolving Role of Natural Products in Drug Discovery,” Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 4, no. 3 (2005): 206–220, 10.1038/nrd1657. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44. Butler M. S., “The Role of Natural Product Chemistry in Drug Discovery,” Journal of Natural Products 67, no. 12 (2004): 2141–2153, 10.1021/np040106y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45. Papadopoulou S. K., Poulios E., Tsopelas F., Tsantili‐Kakoulidou A., and Giaginis C., “Natural Products in Modern Drug Discovery: Advances, Challenges and Emerging Technologies,” Scientia Pharmaceutica 94 (2026): 61, 10.3390/scipharm94030061. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 46. Kingston D. G. I., “Modern Natural Products Drug Discovery and Its Relevance to Biodiversity Conservation,” Journal of Natural Products 74, no. 3 (2011): 496–511, 10.1021/np100550t. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47. Rodrigues T., Reker D., Schneider P., and Schneider G., “Counting on Natural Products for Drug Design,” Nature Chemistry 8, no. 6 (2016): 531–541, 10.1038/nchem.2479. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48. Atanasov A. G., Zotchev S. B., Dirsch V. M., et al., “Natural Products in Drug Discovery: Advances and Opportunities,” Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 20, no. 3 (2021): 200–216, 10.1038/s41573-020-00114-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49. Wang J., Xu C., Wong Y. K., et al., “Artemisinin, the Magic Drug Discovered From Traditional Chinese Medicine,” Engineering 5, no. 1 (2019): 32–39, 10.1016/j.eng.2018.11.011. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 50. Achan J., Talisuna A. O., Erhart A., et al., “Quinine, an Old Anti‐malarial Drug in a Modern World: Role in the Treatment of Malaria,” Malaria Journal 10 (2011): 144, 10.1186/1475-2875-10-144. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51. Tillhon M., Ortiz L. M., Lombardi P., and Scovassi A. I., “Berberine: New Perspectives for Old Remedies,” Toxins (Basel) 4, no. 9 (2012): 85–102. [Google Scholar]
- 52. Jayakumar T., Hsieh C. Y., Lee J. J., and Sheu J. R., “Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology of Andrographolide,” Journal of Ethnopharmacology 150, no. 1 (2013): 1–24.23973523 [Google Scholar]
- 53. Chen F., Chan K. H., Jiang L., et al., “Baicalein Inhibits Influenza Virus Replication Through Downregulation of NF‐κB Signaling,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences 23, no. 1 (2022): 195. [Google Scholar]
- 54. Steinmann J., Buer J., Pietschmann T., and Steinmann E., “Anti‐infective Properties of Epigallocatechin‐3‐gallate (EGCG),” Journal of Applied Microbiology 115, no. 2 (2013): 16–27. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55. Ankri S. and Mirelman D., “Antimicrobial Properties of Allicin From Garlic,” Microbes and Infection 1, no. 2 (1999): 125–129, 10.1016/S1286-4579(99)80003-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56. Marchese A., Orhan I. E., Daglia M., et al., “Antibacterial and Antifungal Activities of Thymol,” Microbiological Research 192 (2016): 65–74.27664724 [Google Scholar]
- 57. Friedman M., Henika P. R., and Mandrell R. E., “Antibacterial Activities of Plant Essential Oil Components, Including Carvacrol,” Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 50, no. 19 (2002): 7322–7328. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58. Babich H., Stern A., and Borenfreund E., “Sanguinarine Cytotoxicity and Antibacterial Action,” Toxicology Letters 136, no. 2 (2002): 133–143.12425963 [Google Scholar]
- 59. Espina L., Somolinos M., Loran S., Conchello P., García D., and Pagán R., “Chemical and Antimicrobial Properties of Limonene,” Food Chemistry 123, no. 4 (2011): 1252–1258. [Google Scholar]
- 60. Srinivasan K., “Black Pepper and Its Pungent Principle‐Piperine: A Review of Diverse Physiological Effects,” Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition 47, no. 8 (2007): 735–748, 10.1080/10408390601062054. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61. Dorantes L., Colmenero R., Hernandez H., et al., “Antimicrobial Activity of Capsicum Frutescens Extract and Capsaicin,” International Journal of Food Microbiology 49, no. 1–2 (2000): 91–97. [Google Scholar]
- 62. Docherty J. J., Smith J. S., Fu M. M., Stoner T., and Booth T., “Resveratrol Inhibition of Viral Replication,” Journal of Medical Virology 75, no. 3 (2005): 593–600.15714486 [Google Scholar]
- 63. Lin Y., Shi R., Wang X., and Shen H. M., “Luteolin: A Novel Anti‐inflammatory and Antiviral Agent,” Journal of Functional Foods 11 (2014): 518–527. [Google Scholar]
- 64. Mendes A., Graziela G., et al., “Ellagic Acid as a Promising Antifungal Agent: A Review of Mechanisms, Synergy, and Formulation Strategies,” Antibiotics 15, no. 1 (2026): 72. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65. Chung K. T., Wong T. Y., Huang Y. W., and Lin Y., “Tannins and Human Health: Antimicrobial Mechanisms,” Critical Reviews in Microbiology 24, no. 4 (1998): 315–341. [Google Scholar]
- 66. Cushnie T. P. T. and Lamb A. J., “Antimicrobial Activity of Flavonoids,” International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents 26, no. 5 (2005): 343–356, 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2005.09.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67. Singh I. P. and Bharate S. B., “Chemistry and Pharmacology of Anti‐infective Natural Products,” Current Science 91, no. 3 (2006): 264–277. [Google Scholar]
- 68. Asif M., “Chemical Characteristics and Pharmacological Profiles of Major Plant Phenolics,” Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry 4, no. 2 (2015): 132–138. [Google Scholar]
- 69. Coşkun N., Demir R., Canbolat A. A., et al., “Polyphenols as Antiviral Agents: Their Potential Against a Range of Virus Types,” Nutrients 17 (2025): 2325, 10.3390/nu17142325. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70. Rafiq M., Xie Z., Hameed S., et al., “Polyphenolic Compounds in Glycyrrhiza spp.: A Potential Weapon Against Multidrug‐Resistant Pathogens,” Frontiers in Pharmacology 17 (2026): 1686787, 10.3389/fphar.2026.1686787. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71. Burt S., “Essential Oils: Their Antibacterial Properties and Potential Applications in Foods—A Review,” International Journal of Food Microbiology 94, no. 3 (2004): 223–253, 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2004.03.022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72. Borges A., Ferreira C., Saavedra M. J., and Simões M., “Antibacterial Activity and Mode of Action of Ferulic and Gallic Acids Against Pathogenic Bacteria,” Microbial Drug Resistance 19, no. 4 (2013): 256–265, 10.1089/mdr.2012.0244. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73. Hyldgaard M., Mygind T., and Meyer R. L., “Essential Oils in Food Preservation: Mode of Action, Synergies, and Interactions With Food Matrix Components,” Frontiers in Microbiology 3 (2012): 12, 10.3389/fmicb.2012.00012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74. Zhang X.‐Z., Chen M.‐X., Hou R., et al., “Natural Alkaloids as Antimicrobial Agents: Mechanisms, Potentials and Challenges,” Molecules 31 (2026): 1204, 10.3390/molecules31071204. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75. Jo S., Kim S., Shin D. H., and Kim M. S., “Inhibition of SARS‐CoV3CL Protease by Flavonoids,” Journal of Enzyme Inhibition and Medicinal Chemistry 35, no. 1 (2020): 145–151, 10.1080/14756366.2019.1690480. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 76. Su H.‐X., Yao S., Zhao W.‐F., et al., “Anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 Activities In Vitro of Shuanghuanglian Preparations and Bioactive Ingredients,” Acta Pharmacologica Sinica 41 (2020): 1167–1177, 10.1038/s41401-020-0483-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77. Nijveldt R. J., van Nood E., van Hoorn D. E., Boelens P. G., van Norren K., and van Leeuwen P. A., “Flavonoids: A Review of Probable Mechanisms of Action and Potential Applications,” American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 74, no. 4 (2001): 418–425, 10.1093/ajcn/74.4.418. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78. Thomford N. E., Senthebane D. A., Rowe A., et al., “Natural Products for Drug Discovery in the 21st Century: Innovations for Novel Drug Discovery,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences 19, no. 6 (2018): 1578, 10.3390/ijms19061578. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 79. Cragg G. M. and Newman D. J., “Natural Products: A Continuing Source of Novel Drug Leads,” Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA)—General Subjects 1830, no. 6 (2013): 3670–3695, 10.1016/j.bbagen.2013.02.008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 80. Wang Y., Gao S., Ye J., et al., “Strategies and Trends in Natural Product Drug Discovery,” Journal of Pharmaceutical Analysis 12, no. 3 (2022): 251–264. [Google Scholar]
- 81. Imenshahidi M. and Hosseinzadeh H., “Berberis Vulgaris and Berberine: An Update Review,” Phytotherapy Research 30, no. 11 (2016): 1745–1764, 10.1002/ptr.5693. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 82. Tillhon M., Ortiz L. M. G., Lombardi P., and Scovassi A. I., “Berberine: New Perspectives for Old Remedies,” Biochemical Pharmacology 84, no. 10 (2012): 1260–1267, 10.1016/j.bcp.2012.07.018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 83. Shahrajabian M. H., Sun W., and Cheng Q., “Pharmacological Uses and Health Benefits of Glycyrrhiza glabra L,” Journal of Medicinal Plants Research 13, no. 11 (2019): 279–285. [Google Scholar]
- 84. Ghosh R., Chakraborty A., Biswas A., and Chowdhuri S., “Evaluation of the Antimicrobial and Antioxidant Properties of Selected Indian Medicinal Plants,” BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine [Electronic Resource] 16 (2016): 200.27393392 [Google Scholar]
- 85. Mbugua P. M., Mbaria J. M., Kanja L. W., and Gakuya D. W., “Natural Product‐Based Lead Discovery for Infectious Diseases,” Journal of Ethnopharmacology 288 (2022): 114926. [Google Scholar]
- 86. Meshnick S. R., “Artemisinin: Mechanisms of Action, Resistance and Toxicity,” International Journal for Parasitology 32, no. 13 (2002): 1655–1660, 10.1016/S0020-7519(02)00194-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 87. Balogun O. and Kang H. W., “Quercetin Protects Intestinal Barrier Integrity in Inflammation and Oxidative Stress,” Nutrients 18 (2026): 2169, 10.3390/nu18132169. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 88. Milutinović M., Dimitrijević‐Branković S., and Rajilić‐Stojanović M., “Plant Extracts Rich in Polyphenols as Potent Modulators in the Growth of Probiotic and Pathogenic Intestinal Microorganisms,” Frontiers in Nutrition 8 (2021): 688843, 10.3389/fnut.2021.688843. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 89. Williams R. J., Spencer J. P. E., and Rice‐Evans C., “Flavonoids: Antioxidants or Signalling Molecules?,” Free Radical Biology and Medicine 36, no. 7 (2004): 838–849, 10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2004.01.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 90. Wang Y.‐Q., Li Q.‐S., Zheng X.‐Q., Lu J.‐L., and Liang Y.‐R., “Antiviral Effects of Green Tea EGCG and Its Potential Application against COVID‐19,” Molecules 26, no. 13 (2021): 3962, 10.3390/molecules26133962. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 91. Mahapatra A. D. and Chattopadhyay D., “Antiviral Potential and In Silico Insights of Polyphenols as Sustainable Phytopharmaceuticals: A Comprehensive Review,” Chemistry & Biodiversity (2025), 10.1002/cbdv.202401913. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 92. Ultee A., Kets E. P. W., and Smid E. J., “Mechanisms of Action of Carvacrol on the Food‐Borne Pathogen Bacillus Cereus,” Applied and Environmental Microbiology 65, no. 10 (1999): 4606–4610, 10.1128/AEM.65.10.4606-4610.1999,. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 93. Kumari P., Ambasta A., Kumar P., Sindhumani, Kumar A., and Tripathi G., “Flavonoids and Their Conjugates: Potential Molecules for Therapeutics,” Current Organic Chemistry 30, no. 8 (2026): 557–588, 10.2174/0113852728381361250820054106. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 94. Panche A. N., Diwan A. D., and Chandra S. R., “Flavonoids: An Overview,” Journal of Nutritional Science 5 (2016): e47, 10.1017/jns.2016.41. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 95. Kim S., Chen J., Cheng T., et al., “PubChem 2023 Update,” Nucleic Acids Research 51, no. D1 (2023): D1373–D1380, 10.1093/nar/gkac956, D1373–D1380. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 96. Over B., Wetzel S., Grütter C., et al., “Natural‐Product‐Derived Fragments for Fragment‐Based Ligand Discovery,” Nature Chemistry 5, no. 1 (2013): 21–28, 10.1038/nchem.1506. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 97. Grabowski K., Baringhaus K. H., and Schneider G., “Scaffold Diversity of Natural Products: Inspiration for Combinatorial Library Design,” Natural Product Reports 25, no. 5 (2008): 892, 10.1039/b715668p. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 98. David B., Wolfender J. L., and Dias D. A., “The Pharmaceutical Industry and Natural Products: Historical Status and New Trends,” Phytochemistry Reviews 14, no. 2 (2015): 299–315, 10.1007/s11101-014-9367-z. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 99. Li J. W. and Vederas J. C., “Drug Discovery and Natural Products: End of an Era or an Endless Frontier?,” Science 325, no. 5937 (2009): 161–165, 10.1126/science.1168243. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 100. Hertweck C., “The Biosynthetic Logic of Polyketide Diversity,” Angewandte Chemie International Edition 48, no. 26 (2009): 4688–4716, 10.1002/anie.200806121. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 101. Ekor M., “The Growing Use of Herbal Medicines: Issues Relating to Adverse Reactions and Challenges in Monitoring Safety,” Frontiers in Pharmacology 4 (2014): 177, 10.3389/fphar.2013.00177. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 102. EMA Guideline on the Quality of Herbal Medicinal Products (European Medicines Agency, 2016). [Google Scholar]
- 103. Calixto J. B., “Efficacy, Safety, Quality Control, Marketing and Regulatory Guidelines for Herbal Medicines (Phytotherapeutic agents),” Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research 33, no. 2 (2000): 179–189, 10.1590/S0100-879X2000000200004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 104. Williamson E. M., Lorenc A., Booker A., and Robinson N., “The Rise of Traditional Chinese Medicine and Complementary Medicine in the West: Safety and Efficacy Concerns,” Drug Safety 36, no. 8 (2013): 601–608. [Google Scholar]
- 105. Houghton P. J., “The Role of Plants in Traditional Medicine and Current Therapy,” Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine 1, no. 2 (1995): 131–143, 10.1089/acm.1995.1.131. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 106. Teschke R., Eickhoff A., and Schulze J., “Herbal Hepatotoxicity—An Update on Traditional Chinese Medicine Preparations,” Journal of Clinical and Translational Hepatology 2, no. 3 (2014): 151–162. [Google Scholar]
- 107. Singh A. and Zao K., “Chapter Nine ‐ Herb–Drug Interactions of Commonly Used Chinese Medicinal Herbs,” International Review of Neurobiology 135 (2017): 197–232, 10.1016/bs.irn.2017.02.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 108. Wink M., “Evolution of Secondary Metabolites From an Ecological and Molecular Phylogenetic Perspective,” Phytochemistry 64, no. 1 (2003): 3–19, 10.1016/S0031-9422(03)00300-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 109. Tang J., Song B., Wang Y., et al., “Pharmacokinetic Studies of Plant‐Derived Natural Products,” Journal of Ethnopharmacology 283 (2022): 114686.34571079 [Google Scholar]
- 110. Serafini M., Peluso I., and Raguzzini A., “Flavonoids as Anti‐Inflammatory Agents,” Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 69, no. 3 (2010): 273–278, 10.1017/S002966511000162X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 111. Efferth T. and Koch E., “Complex Interactions between Phytochemicals. The Multi‐Target Therapeutic Concept of Phytotherapy,” Current Drug Targets 12, no. 1 (2011): 122–132, 10.2174/138945011793591626. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 112. Upton R., Graff A., Jolliffe G., et al., “The Importance of Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs) for Botanical Dietary Supplements,” HerbalGram 126 (2020): 58–69. [Google Scholar]
- 113. Sultana B., Anwar F., and Ashraf M., “Effect of Extraction Solvent/Technique on the Antioxidant Activity of Selected Medicinal Plant Extracts,” Molecules 14, no. 6 (2009): 2167–2180, 10.3390/molecules14062167. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 114. Ghasemzadeh A. and Jaafar H. N., “Flavonoids and Phenolic Acids: Role and Biochemical Activity in Plants and Human Health,” Scientific World Journal 2014 (2014): 620247. [Google Scholar]
- 115. Pietta P. G., “Flavonoids as Antioxidants,” Journal of Natural Products 63, no. 7 (2000): 1035–1042, 10.1021/np9904509. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 116. Wojdyło A., Oszmiański J., and Czemerys R., “Antioxidant Activity and Phenolic Compounds in 32 Selected Herbs,” Food Chemistry 105, no. 3 (2007): 940–949. [Google Scholar]
- 117. Scalbert A., Johnson I. T., and Saltmarsh M., “Polyphenols: Antioxidants and Beyond,” American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 81, no. Suppl. 1 (2005): 215S–217S, 10.1093/ajcn/81.1.215S. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 118. Dinda B., Debnath S., Mohanta B. C., and Harigaya Y., “Naturally Occurring Triterpenoid Saponins,” Chemistry & Biodiversity 7, no. 9 (2010): 2327–2580, 10.1002/cbdv.200800070. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 119. Sparg S. G., Light M. E., and van Staden J., “Biological Activities and Distribution of Plant Saponins,” Journal of Ethnopharmacology 94, no. 2‐3 (2004): 219–243, 10.1016/j.jep.2004.05.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 120. Hostettmann K. and Marston A., Saponins (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2005). [Google Scholar]
- 121. Avato P., Bucci R., and Tava A., “Antimicrobial Activity of Saponins From Medicago sativa L. Against Bacterial and Fungal Pathogens,” Phytochemistry Reviews 5, no. 1 (2006): 327–335. [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
Data has been made available for other Reseachers availability.
