Skip to main content
. 2018 Oct 24;11(3):336–343. doi: 10.1016/j.jaim.2017.10.012

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Effect of panchvalkal formulation on C. violaceum (*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001; AS: Antibiotic susceptibility; QS: Quorum sensing; PF: Panchvalkal formulation) 1 (A). Effect of PF on growth and QS regulated violacein production in C. violaceum: Bacterial growth was measured as OD764; OD of violacein was measured at 585 nm, and violacein unit was calculated as the ratio OD585/OD764 (an indication of violacein production per unit of growth) ‘Control’ bar in this figure is the ‘vehicle control’ representing the % change values in comparison to the ‘growth control’ i.e. tube containing only growth medium plus organism, but no DMSO. 1 (B). Kaplan–Meier survival curve showing the protective effect of PF (750 μg/ml) on C. elegans, when challenged with C. violaceum: Catechin (50 μg/ml) and ampicillin (500 μg/ml) employed as positive controls conferred 100% protection. DMSO present in the ‘vehicle control’ at 0.5% v/v did not affect virulence of the bacterium towards C. elegans. 1 (C). C. violaceum challenged with PF and antibiotic together. 1 (D). C. violaceum challenged with antibiotic following pre-treatment with PF (750 g/ml).