Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Jun 1.
Published in final edited form as: Chem Biol Drug Des. 2015 Jul 25;86(6):1331–1338. doi: 10.1111/cbdd.12614

Table 1. Natural product extract hits by plate.

Plate numbers 1–8 9–15 16–23 All plates
Collection dates 2007–2009 2010–2011 2012–2014 2007–2014
ISP2 media
 No. of extracts 4663 3837 2371 10 871
 >50% inhibition 1.5% 10.2% 37.1% 12.3%
 >90% inhibition 0.4% 1.7% 3.5% 1.6%
Nutrient poor media
 No. of extracts 4625 3902 2281 10 808
 >50% inhibition 0.5% 4.1% 13.8% 4.6%
 >90% inhibition 0.2% 0.6% 0.9% 0.5%
A3M Media
 No. of extracts 1062 1062
 >50% inhibition 49.1% 49.1%
 >90% inhibition 8.9% 8.9%
Corynebacterium Co-culture
 No. of extracts 755 755
 >50% inhibition 56.6% 56.6%
 >90% inhibition 9.5% 9.5%
Rhodococcus Co-culture
 No. of extracts 1022 1022
 >50% inhibition 46.3% 46.3%
 >90% inhibition 8.0% 8.0%
Other media
 No. of extracts 689 958 2734 4381
 >50% inhibition 34.0% 16.2% 21.0% 22.0%
 >90% inhibition 9.6% 3.5% 3.3% 4.3%
All media types
 No. of extracts 9977 8697 10 225 28 899
 >50% inhibition 3.3% 8.1% 31.2% 14.6%
 >90% inhibition 0.9% 1.4% 4.3% 2.3%
Extract selection 96 336 895 1327
Confirmation screen
 >50% inhibition (triplicate) 20.8% 38.4% 55.6% 48.8%
 >90% inhibition (triplicate) 8.3% 10.4% 12.5% 11.7%
Luciferase counterscreen
 <50% inhibition (triplicate) 89.6% 65.8% 71.2% 71.1%
 <20% inhibition (triplicate) 40.6% 42.6% 28.4% 32.9%
Final extract selection 8 31 71 110