Table 1.
Growth mediums and incubated conditions of oral pathogens.
Table 2.
Major chemical constituents of Citrus aurantifolia peel oils. Comparison of retention time and relative peak area of key components, and match score in Lime TH and Lime SF based on GC-MS analysis.
Fig 1.
GC-MS chromatograms of Citrus aurantifolia peel oils.
Chromatograms of peel oils obtained from (A) Thai lime (Lime TH) and (B) South African lime (Lime SF), showing D-limonene as the predominant component at a retention time of 7.25 minutes with characteristic ions at m/z 68, 79, 93, and 136. Twelve key volatile components were identified, including α-pinene, β-pinene, β-myrcene, p-cymene, D-limonene, γ-terpinene, terpinolene, linalool, terpinen-4-ol, α-terpineol, neral, and citral.
Fig 2.
HPLC chromatograms of Ocimum sanctum ethanolic extract (OSE) and ursolic acid standard.
(A) ursolic acid standard showing a sharp peak at 0.30 mg/mL and (B) OSE showing a complex phytochemical profile with multiple peaks at 50 mg/mL. Ursolic acid was identified in OSE with a retention time of 15.60 minutes.
Table 3.
MIC, MBC/MFC values, and MBC/MIC ratios of Lime TH, Lime SF, and OSE. Antimicrobial activity against five oral pathogens compared to 0.12% chlorhexidine gluconate (positive control).
Fig 3.
Time-kill curves showing the antimicrobial activity of test agents against Lactobacillus acidophilus.
Each panel shows the reduction in log10 CFU/mL over time for treatments with Lime TH (A), Lime SF (B), and OSE (C). Each data point represents the mean ± SD (n = 3). Asterisks indicate significant differences compared to the untreated control at corresponding time points (p < 0.05).
Fig 4.
Time-kill curves showing the antimicrobial activity of test agents against Streptococcus mutans.
Each panel shows the reduction in log10 CFU/mL over time for treatments with Lime TH (A), Lime SF (B), and OSE (C). Each data point represents the mean ± SD (n = 3). Asterisks indicate significant differences compared to the untreated control at corresponding time points (*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01).
Fig 5.
Time-kill curves showing the antimicrobial activity of test agents against Porphyromonas gingivalis.
Each panel shows the reduction in log10 CFU/mL over time for treatments with Lime TH (A), Lime SF (B), and OSE (C). Each data point represents the mean ± SD (n = 3). Asterisks indicate significant differences compared to the untreated control at corresponding time points (*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01).
Fig 6.
Time-kill curves showing the antimicrobial activity of test agents against Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans.
Each panel shows the reduction in log10 CFU/mL over time for treatments with Lime TH (A), Lime SF (B), and OSE (C). Each data point represents the mean ± SD (n = 3). Asterisks indicate significant differences compared to the untreated control at corresponding time points (*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01).
Fig 7.
Time-kill curves showing the antimicrobial activity of test agents against Candida albicans.
Each panel shows the reduction in log10 CFU/mL over time for treatments with Lime TH (A), Lime SF (B), and OSE (C). Each data point represents the mean ± SD (n = 3). Asterisks indicate significant differences compared to the untreated control at corresponding time points (p < 0.05).