Table 2.
Group | Onset of diarrhea (min) | Number of wet feces | Number of total feces | % inhibition of defecation |
---|---|---|---|---|
Control | 46.83 ± 3.21 | 9.10 ± 0.47 | 11.83 ± 0.60 | — |
CF 100 mg/kg | 60.83 ± 2.12b∗ | 8.30 ± 0.34b∗∗∗ | 10.00 ± 0.72b∗∗∗ | 8.80 |
CF 200 mg/kg | 72.83 ± 3.38b∗∗∗ | 7.60 ± 0.46b∗∗∗ | 8.60 ± 0.46b∗∗∗ | 16.50 |
CF 400 mg/kg | 102 ± 2.47 a∗∗∗b∗ | 5.60 ± 0.23a∗∗∗b∗ | 7.20 ± 0.20a∗b∗∗∗ | 38.46 |
Loperamide 3 mg/kg | 154.66 ± 6.8a∗∗∗ | 1.40 ± 0.2a∗∗∗ | 3.00 ± 0.25a∗∗∗ | 84.60 |
| ||||
Control | 44 ± 2.84 | 9.10 ± 0.47 | 10.00 ± 0.85 | — |
EAF 100 mg/kg | 55.5 ± 2.64b∗∗∗ | 8.16 ± 0.77b∗∗∗ | 9.00 ± 0.85b∗∗∗ | 10.32 |
EAF 200 mg/kg | 68.00 ± 3.65b∗∗∗ | 7.10 ± 0.83b∗∗∗ | 7.00 ± 0.77b∗∗∗ | 22.20 |
EAF 400 mg/kg | 99.00 ± 4.15a∗∗∗b∗∗∗ | 3.83 ± 0.34a∗∗∗b∗∗∗ | 5.33 ± 0.49a∗∗b∗ | 57.91 |
Loperamide 3 mg/kg | 141.00 ± 7.14a∗∗∗ | 1.66 ± 0.21a∗∗∗ | 3.10 ± 0.32a∗∗∗ | 76.62 |
| ||||
Control | 48.50 ± 4.52 | 9.10 ± 0.47 | 10.16 ± 0.75 | — |
AF 100 mg/kg | 71.33 ± 8.76b∗∗∗ | 5.16 ± 0.47b∗∗∗ | 6.33 ± 0.71b∗∗∗ | 43.29 |
AF 200 mg/kg | 88.65 ± 7.74a∗b∗∗∗ | 3.50 ± 0.42a∗∗b∗ | 5.50 ± 0.61a∗∗ | 61.53 |
AF 400 mg/kg | 91.57 ± 10.88a∗∗b∗ | 2.00 ± 0.25a∗∗∗ | 3.66 ± 0.33a∗∗∗ | 78.00 |
Loperamide 3 mg/kg | 138.50 ± 7.65a∗∗∗ | 1.83 ± 0.33a∗∗∗ | 3.60 ± 0.18a∗∗∗ | 80.00 |
Data are expressed as mean ± SEM (n = 6); analysis was performed with One-Way ANOVA followed by Tukey test; acompared to negative control; bcompared to loperamide 3 mg/kg; ∗P < 0.05, ∗∗P < 0.01, and ∗∗∗P < 0.001; CF: chloroform fraction; EAF: ethyl acetate fraction; AF: aqueous fraction; negative controls received 10 ml/kg distilled water.