Table 2: Comparison of the antimicrobial activity of tumbo dentifrice against seven strains of the oral cavity (formulation without fluoride).

MicroorganismsPart of the plantEvaluation time (hours)Mean ± SDMinMax

S. mutansPulp2420.0 ± 2.117.825.20.093
4819.3 ± 1.117.621.10.479
Peel2416.0 ± 1.514.618.60.008
4815.5 ± 1.513.818.00.061

E. faecalisPulp2415.5 ± 1.113.817.30.492
4815.2 ± 1.213.017.00.999
Peel2415.5 ± 0.415.016.50.647
4815 ± 0.414.315.80.988

ActinomycesPulp2418.3 ± 117.320.20.012
4823.6 ± 4.417.029.00.078
Peel2418.7 ± 3.316.329.1
4818.6 ± 3.316.329.1

LactobacillusPulp2420.8 ± 0.619.822.10.623
4820.2 ± 0.718.921.50.491
Peel2417.6 ± 0.217.218.10.842
4817.1 ± 0.216.817.60.511

C. albicansPulp2415.5 ± 0.913.817.10.730
4824.7 ± 1.323.027.20.540
Peel2419.3 ± 1.716.222.30.534
4818.8 ± 1.816.022.10.274

S. sanguinisPulp2414.9 ± 0.114.715.30.331
4814.1 ± 0.512.914.90.555
Peel2415.9 ± 0.415.316.60.447
4815.1 ± 0.514.216.00.406

S. oralisPulp2414.5 ± 0.913.616.40.016
4814.1 ± 0.913.016.20.195
Peel2416.5 ± 0.415.617.30.699
4815.7 ± 0.614.816.80.941

All measurements were made in mm. Shapiro–Wilk test.