|
Peeling Away Problems The Antioxidating, Antimicrobial, and Antimutagenic Effects of Tree Bark |
Menu
| Home | Project Info | Objective | Introduction | Hypothesis | Materials | Methods |
| Results | Conclusions | Sources of Error | Applications | Acknowledgements | Bibliography | Glossary |
|
Results for the Folin-Ciocalteau Assay. Results for the FRAP Assay. Results for the Ames Test. Results For both of the Bacterial Susceptibility Tests, Ampicillin was used as a positive control against all four bacteria. The diameter of the inhibition zone was measured in mm with a ruler subtracted by 6mm, which is the diameter of the well that holds the extract (Reference 2, Fig. 3).
Figure 3: Selected photographs of the bacterial inhibition test to show the size and shape of the inhibition zone. Ampicillin was used as a positive control. JP=Jack Pine, PB=Paper Birch, WS=White Spruce, TA=Trembling Aspen.
The results were recorded and statistic analysis was performed to show the difference in growth inhibition (Table 1).
All the extracts except for Jack Pine showed signs of strong inhibition. For the E.coli strain, there was not much inhibition overall. However, for the other 3 strains (which are also considered ‘clinically important bacteria’): White Spruce, Paper Birch, and Trembling Aspen extracts all showed strong inhibition. |