Table 1.
Extract | Conc./plate (%) | TA97a (-S9)* |
TA98 (+S9) |
TA100 (+S9) |
TA102 (-S9) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
MeOH | 50 | 18.4 ± 1.6c | (−) 48.9 ± 12.7c# | (−) 16.2 ± 5.6c# | 72.0 ± 15.1c |
25 | 38.1 ± 6.3b | 17.0 ± 3.6b | 68.1 ± 3.7b | 97.2 ± 1.4b | |
10 | 85.4 ± 3.7a | 91.4 ± 1.6a | 83.2 ± 5.8a | 114.5 ± 3.1a | |
EA | 20 | 26.0 ± 3.3c | 41.8 ± 2.5c | 57.2 ± 5.8c | 98.6 ± 3.9c |
10 | 64.8 ± 4.9b | 69.7 ± 2.8b | 75.5 ± 4.2b | 109.0 ± 4.7b | |
5 | 90.2 ± 3.2a | 91.8 ± 3.7a | 95.6 ± 3.9a | 127.3 ± 10.4a | |
Diagnostic mutagen | 9-AA (0.02 μg/plate) |
2-AAF (5 μg/plate) |
AFB1 (40 μg/plate) |
CHP (0.1 μg/plate) |
|
Revertant counts | 369 ± 5 | 256 ± 6 | 373 ± 5 | 997 ± 99 |
*For TA97a concentration is 0.5, 1 and 2.5% for both extracts. The means of % inhibition of the three dilutions were compared for both extracts to determine significant differences between them. Mean % inhibitions followed with different letters indicate significant difference between them at P ≤ 0.01. Means followed by the same letters indicated no significant difference at P ≤ 0.01# pro-mutagenicity of the 10% solution of the aqueous methanol extract
Abbreviations: Conc concentration, MeOH aqueous methanol extract, EA ethylacetate extract, 9-AA 9-aminoacradine, 2-AAF 2-acetamidofluorene, AFB1 aflatoxin B1, CHP cumoyl hydroperoxide