none 10.31254/phyto.2025.14504 BioMed Research Publishers BioMed Research Publishers 16195 187186475 316921 20251216133144430 10.31254 2025-12-16T13:31:48Z 2025-12-16T13:31:46Z 0 The Journal of Phytopharmacology J Phytopharmacol 2320480X 10.31254/phyto https://www.phytopharmajournal.com/ 11 30 2025 14 5 F Jasmine https://orcid.org/0009-0000-8164-6628 K R Beula Rani https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0148-9288 Background: Plants from the genus Piper have long been used in traditional medicine for their diverse pharmacological properties. Among them, Piper betle and Piper longum are known for their potential therapeutic effects, yet comparative studies on their antimicrobial and antioxidant activities remain limited. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the antimicrobial and antioxidant properties of various solvent extracts prepared from the leaf, stem, and root parts of Piper betle and Piper longum. Materials and Methods: Solvent extracts were prepared from different plant parts using appropriate solvents. Antimicrobial activity was tested against four bacterial strains (Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, Proteus vulgaris, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa), and two fungal strains (Aspergillus niger and Rhizopus sp.) using the agar well diffusion method. Antioxidant activity was determined by the DPPH radical scavenging assay, and IC₅₀ values were calculated. Results: Piper betle demonstrated a broader and stronger antimicrobial spectrum than Piper longum. The methanolic leaf extract of P. betle (A1MH) exhibited the highest inhibition zone (21 mm) against Proteus vulgaris, whereas Pseudomonas aeruginosa was resistant to all extracts. In antioxidant assays, A1MH showed the strongest activity with an IC₅₀ value of 37.57 µg/ml, comparable to that of standard ascorbic acid (IC₅₀ = –0.10 µg/ml). Piper longum extracts displayed comparatively lower antioxidant potential. Conclusion: The methanolic leaf extract of Piper betle exhibited significant antimicrobial and antioxidant activities, supporting its traditional use as a natural therapeutic agent. Further studies are warranted to isolate and characterize the bioactive compounds responsible for these effects. 11 30 2025 327 334 1 10.31254/biomed-crossmark-policy www.biomedresearch.org false 10.31254/phyto.2025.14504 https://phytopharmajournal.com/articles/abstracts/846/year=2025&vol=14&issue=5