2017
DOI: 10.5897/jpp2017.0461
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Pharmacognostic evaluation of the leaves and roots of Cassia sieberiana DC.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

2
1
2

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
2
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…This variation can also be due to duration of the extraction and part of the plant used. The trend observed from the result of this study is in agreement with Fatokun et al (2017).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…This variation can also be due to duration of the extraction and part of the plant used. The trend observed from the result of this study is in agreement with Fatokun et al (2017).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…This variation may be attributed to the difference in the parts of the plant used for the investigation. Although the result abtained from this study agrees with result of Fatokun et al (2017) who reported acid insoluble ash of 1.5 % (w/w) from the root bark of the plant.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 89%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The moisture content of U. chamae (7.59 ± 1.24) is indicative of low moisture content. This is slightly below limit for water content (8 to 14%) for vegetable drugs (African Pharmacopoeia, 1985;Fatokun et al, 2017). Extractive values are used to determine the number of active constituents in a defined amount of plant material when extracted with a particular solvent.…”
Section: -246mentioning
confidence: 99%