You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
Methods and Protocols
  • Review
  • Open Access

2 August 2025

The Allium cepa Model: A Review of Its Application as a Cytogenetic Tool for Evaluating the Biosafety Potential of Plant Extracts

,
,
,
and
1
Department of Biology, Faculty of Sciences, “Vasile Alecsandri” University of Bacău, 157, Calea Mărășești, 600115 Bacău, Romania
2
Department of Chemical and Food Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, “Vasile Alecsandri” University of Bacău, 157, Calea Mărășești, 600115 Bacău, Romania
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Papers in Methods and Protocols 2025

Abstract

In establishing the safety or tolerability profile of bioactive plant extracts, it is important to perform toxicity studies using appropriate, accessible, and sustainable methods. The Allium cepa model is well known and frequently used for accurate environmental risk assessments, as well as for evaluating the toxic potential of the bioactive compounds of plant extracts. The present review focuses on this in vivo cytogenetic model, highlighting its widespread utilization and advantages as a first assessment in monitoring the genotoxicity and cytotoxicity of herbal extracts, avoiding the use of animals for testing. This plant-based assay allows for the detection of the possible cytotoxic and genotoxic effects induced on onion meristematic cells. The outcomes of the Allium cepa assay are comparable to other tests on various organisms, making it a reliable screening test due to its simplicity in terms of implementation, as well as its high sensitivity and reproducibility.

1. Introduction

In recent years, research on plant extracts has continuously increased, highlighting their importance and use in various fields, including the food, pharmaceutical, and cosmetic industries []. An inexhaustibly rich source of bioactive phytocompounds, plant extracts may have multiple therapeutic and pharmacological benefits for human health [,].
The biomolecules extracted from plants have excellent potential for replacing synthetic drugs. Plant-based extracts are perceived as an alternative or as a complement to classical medicine, their integration in various treatments being a sustainable strategy [,,,,,].
However, in addition to the extraction, analysis, or isolation of certain bioactive compounds, researchers have been concerned with the toxicity of herbal extracts. As they are a complex mixture of compounds, and due to the possible interaction between certain compounds, the plant extracts are not completely without side effects or toxicity []. Even though some extracts are considered beneficial, if consumed in large quantities, they can be toxic. The toxicity of herbal extracts depends on several factors, including the extraction method, chemical composition, dosage, and interactions with other substances.
Therefore, researchers consider it imperative and of great importance to evaluate the cytotoxic potential of plant extracts, to ensure that their use is harmless. Various in vivo and in vitro assay are used for establishing the safety or tolerability profiles of bioactive plant extracts; toxicological methods frequently involve brine shrimp, cell lines or animals [,]. Before performing very elaborate, long-term and expensive tests on cell lines and knowing that toxicity assessment involving animal experiments is limited by ethical and economic reasons, more accessible and sustainable assays can be carried out as an initial rapid and low-cost approach in the evaluation of the toxicity.
Higher plants are representative systems that are known to be sensitive indicators to the action of toxic agents. Materials of plant origin, such as whole plants, seeds, organs and tissues, have proven to be suitable for monitoring cytotoxicity when exposed to different chemical agents [,].
Plant-based monitoring systems rely on microscopic observations of aberrations occurring during mitosis and the subsequent effects on chromosomes. Therefore, plants such as Allium cepa, Allium sativum, Lactuca sativa, Sinapis alba, Triticum aestivum, Vicia faba, Zea mays, etc., possess excellent characteristics for monitoring and screening the cytotoxicity of different agents [,,,,,,]. The advantages of the plant-based toxicity system are numerous: the ease of obtaining the material, its storage and handling, simplicity and rapidity of implementation, high sensitivity and reproducibility [,,,,].
In search of such a method for evaluating the potential toxicity of some plant extracts, following a careful and meticulous bibliographic study, our research team turned its attention to the Allium cepa model [,].
Due to our successful application of this plant-based system, the present article constitutes an exploratory review of the Allium cepa model: in particular, its use as a cytogenetic tool for assessing the biosafety potential of plant extracts. We highlight the advantages it offers.
Moreover, this review aims to highlight the differences between the experimental protocols and the influences of several factors related to both the extraction process for the tested samples and the experimental conditions of the Allium test itself on the level of cytogenotoxicity of plant extracts. These aspects are less frequently discussed in the very few reviews already published [,,]. Additionally, this systematic review intends to provide an overview of the plant species studied using this model.

2. The Allium cepa Model: General Considerations

The Allium cepa test is an in vivo experimental model used to evaluate DNA damage (clastogenic and/or aneugenic effects) by identifying chromosomal aberrations and disorders occurring in the mitotic cycle, due to the action of various mutagenic agents.
Since 1938, when it was used for the first time by Levan [] when studying the effect of colchicine on the mitosis of onions, the methodology of the Allium cepa assay has undergone continuous improvements, making it appropriate for many applications. Important contributions to the development of this bioassay were made by Grant [,], Fiskesjö [,], Rank and Nielsen [] (Figure 1). They reported that, when compared to other test materials, Allium material can produce similar results. It has also been demonstrated that this model has high sensitivity and can be used as a standard method for environmental monitoring [,,,].
Figure 1. Some important moments in the timeline of the Allium cepa bioassay.
Over the years, the Allium cepa model has been used, with good results, in the detection of a wide variety of pollutants and chemical agents (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Cytotoxicity screening of different agents using the Allium cepa model.
Several comprehensive reviews concerning the application of the Allium cepa as environmental monitoring assay have been reported [,,,,]. Research describing the use of A. cepa tests in the investigation of heavy metal accumulation in soil, surface water and sediment, industrial wastewater, groundwater, vegetables, etc., are noteworthy [,,,,,].
The A. cepa bioassay was successfully applied to effluents from the tannery, textile and plastic industries [,,,,]. Several studies are related to the cytotoxicity of some herbicides [], pesticides [,,,], fungicides [], insecticides [], or other chemical agents [,]. Moreover, the potential cytotoxicities of therapeutic drugs (e.g., doxorubicin, erlotibin, metalodrugs, nevirapine, etc.) [,,], food additives (e.g., saccharin, potassium metabisulphite) and animal feeds additives (e.g., urea) [,] were tested using the Allium cepa assay. Additionally, the Allium cepa model was reported “as a ‘warning’ bioindicator in detecting the genotoxicity of medicinal plants” [,].

3. Basic Principles of the Allium cepa Test and Protocol

Toxicity studies based on the Allium test are performed on onion roots, which, when exposed to different substances, can indicate their potential cytotoxic or genotoxic effect on organisms.
Onions are considered appropriate for toxicological evaluations because the roots grow rapidly and their tips contain cells in various phases of cell division, showing a clear and rapid response to genotoxic substances; moreover, spontaneous chromosomal damage rarely occurs. Due to the presence of distinct cells, large chromosomes in a reduced number (2n = 2x = 16), and a stable karyotype, it is easy to identify the possible chromosomal lesions and mitotic cycle disorders under a microscope [,,]. The reduced number of chromosomes (8 pairs) compared with other species (e.g., wheat Triticum aestivum: 2n = 42) simplifies their tracking and identification during cell division, highlighting possible mutations that can affect the number of chromosomes such as polyploidy (3x, 4x, etc.) or aneuploidy (2n + 1, 2n − 1).
Some characteristics of the onion that make it suitable for cytogenetic tests are presented in Figure 3.
Figure 3. Characteristics of the onion that make it suitable for cytogenetic tests.
Since 1938, when Levan [] described the first protocol for the Allium cepa test, the recommended plant material is represented by the onion bulbs with rapidly growing root tips used in most reported studies. The cells of the root tip actively divide, being the first to come into contact with substances in the environment. Therefore, toxic effects on mitosis and chromosome behavior during the division phases can be observed []. Buds from germinated seeds can also be used for the same purpose, as mentioned in other research [,]; alternatively, seeds are first germinated in water until the roots are about 2 mm in height [,].
The onion bulbs used for testing should be of similar size (approximately 1.5–2.0 cm in diameter) and not exposed to herbicide or fungicide treatments [,]. Generally, between three and five onion bulbs are needed for each sample (including the control) to obtain roots. According to the protocol proposed by Tedesco and Laughinghouse [] as a standard experiment for the Allium test, it is recommended to use five different sets of bulbs: one for the negative control, one for the positive control with a known genotoxic agent, and three groups for different concentrations of the test agent. Some authors initially use a larger number of bulbs to test their germination rate, placing them in water for two or four days. Subsets of three or five bulbs which showed the best root growth are then chosen to be exposed to the test solutions [,,,,]. It is recommended that the bulbs be lightly scraped in the lower area (primary root ring), to favor the emergence of new roots [,]. Many studies report that onion bulbs are initially placed in distilled or tap water (if potable) in narrow glass or plastic containers (50 mL) []. Only the area where the roots will form is submerged in water. The water should be renewed every day until the roots grow to a certain length. Root growth varies in time (two to four days), depending on the temperature conditions in which the onion bulbs are stored (a room or growth room/chamber at 22 ± 2 °C) []. If onion bulbs are placed in a growth chamber, a controlled photoperiod (18 h/6 h light/dark) can also be ensured. When the roots reach the appropriate length (0.5–2 cm), the onion bulbs may be transferred to the flasks containing the different test extracts and only the base of each bulb should be immersed/suspended in the extract. The exposure time of onion roots in the tested plant extracts may vary: 24 h [,], 48 h [,], 72 h [], 96 h []. Sabini et al. [] reported two and five days, as well as two days followed by three days with water (reversion) of exposure.
The main steps for the Allium cepa protocol are presented in Figure 4.
Figure 4. Basic protocol steps for the Allium cepa model.
In the standard Allium testing protocol, normal tap water [,,,], or distilled water [] are used as the negative control sample. It seems that, compared to tap water, distilled water used as a negative control leads to a statistically significant inhibition of mitosis in the apical cell of the onion []. Several studies report the use of a positive control sample, in addition to a negative control sample. Various substances are used as positive controls, namely: glyphosate [,,,,,], cyclophosphamide [], methotrexate [,], paracetamol [,], methyl methane sulfonate [], ethyl methane sulfonate [,,], copper sulfate [,], lead nitrate [], hydrogen peroxide [], sodium azide [], dimethyl sulfoxide []. Glyphosate, most commonly used as a positive control, is a chemical compound known for its extremely cytogenotoxic effect; it is used as herbicide for a broad spectrum of weeds [,]. When the essential oil samples are tested, ethanol or methanol is used as positive control [,].
At the end of the exposure period, onion roots treated with the test solutions, including the control, are harvested for cytogenetic preparations. Each plant has its own biological clock for mitotic division; therefore, the root harvesting should be performed when the meristematic cells are actively dividing []. The timing of root cutting is therefore a crucial step to identify as many cells as possible in the different phases of mitotic division. The duration of mitosis in roots of Allium cepa L. is about 4 h (prophase—2 h, metaphase—40 min, anaphase + telophase − 1 hrs and 20 min) []. According to Sangur et al. [], a high frequency of metaphase cells coincides with a high value of the mitotic index. Therefore, it is advisable to harvest the roots at the time of metaphase unfolding within the mitotic division. Well-growing roots with an average length of 1–2 cm are the best candidates for cytogenetic studies, while exceptionally long or short roots are removed [,].
After harvesting, the roots should be immersed in a fixative solution, which has the role of instantly coagulating the cellular constituents. In this way, the cells are rapidly fixed in the phase of mitotic division at that time. A mixture of alcohol and acetic acid can be used for this step, namely, Clarke’s fixative (ethanol:glacial acetic acid, 3:1 v/v) for 90 min [,], Farmer solution (ethanol:glacial acetic acid, 3:1 v/v) [,,], Carnoy’s solution (ethanol:glacial acetic acid, 3:1 v/v) [], or a solution of acetic acid:methanol, 1:3 v/v []. Fixation is achieved by keeping the harvested roots in fixative solutions for 12–18 h at 4 °C in the refrigerator. Until microscopic preparations are made, the roots can be preserved in 70% ethanol in the refrigerator for several months [,]. In the protocol described by Wierzbicka [], fixation can be performed in a solution containing hydrochloric acid (glacial acetic acid (45%):HCl (1N), 9:1 v/v) by immersing the roots for 5 min at 50 °C. Therefore, together with fixation, hydrolysis of onion roots also occurs [].
The hydrolysis step is performed with the aim of dissolving the pectocelluloses from the cell wall, allowing the dye used for coloration to penetrate the cell and the chromosomes in the nucleus. In this regard, root hydrolysis can be performed at room temperature with 1N HCl for 20–30 min, or at 60 °C (in a water bath) for 5–10 min. Thus, the root tissue softens, and the dye is able to penetrate the cells, reaching the nucleus to stain the genetic material. Then, the roots are gently rinsed with distilled water, avoiding damage to the hydrolyzed tips. This step is very important because, if HCl is not removed by washing the roots, staining is compromised and the cells cannot be identified under the microscope [,,].
Root coloring is accomplished by treating the roots with different dyes, allowing the microscopic observation of various cell categories in interphase or division. Thus, aceto-orcein solution (2%) [,,,,], acetocarmine (2%) [,,] or lacto-propionic orcein [] ensure a rapid staining in few hours and a good contrast of the chromosomes, which explains their frequent use in the mentioned studies. The cytogenetic preparations must be visualized immediately, because their discoloration occurs over time, which represents a disadvantage of using these staining solutions. For the accuracy of cytogenetic preparations, a staining step with Schiff reagent [,] or carbol fuchsin solution [] is recommended in cytogenetic research, which allow for a very good visualization of nuclei, chromatin and chromosomes in metaphase or anaphase. The microscopic preparations are persistent, and the roots remain stained for a long time (one to two years) if kept in the refrigerator. However, the need for a carefully controlled acid hydrolysis and the longer root staining time (three to five days in the refrigerator) could constitute disadvantages of using these types of coloring agents. Vicentini et al. [] reported that the roots were fixed and stained with Feulgen reaction.
After root staining, preparation of microscope slides for cell analysis is carried out via the “squash” technique, consisting first in placing one to two onion roots on a microscope slide, in a drop of acetic acid aqueous solution. By cutting the tips of the roots (approximately 1–2 mm) with a scalpel, only the area containing the meristematic cells where mitosis occurs is preserved for microscopic analysis. Then, a coverslip is placed over the tissue and the plant material is crushed by pressing. The cells are thus arranged in a single plane, without overlapping, so that they can be observed individually under the microscope [,]. For each bulb, from the harvested and stained roots, two or three slides are prepared for analysis and cell counting under a microscope [,,]. Yekeen et al. [] reported that, for the fixation and preservation of the samples, the slides can be immersed in liquid nitrogen, thus allowing their subsequent evaluation. For the same purpose, the edges of the slide can be sealed by applying transparent nail polish, so that the cytogenetic preparation can be analyzed even after several days [,,].
One of the objectives of cytogenetic research is to analyze the number and behavior of chromosomes in dividing cells, under the influence of different types of plant extracts.
The analysis of cytogenetic preparations is performed using the 40× and 100× objectives of an optical microscope, which can be equipped with a camera and connected to a computer [,,].
Each microscopic slide is examined to identify and quantify the different cell types present in the microscopic fields. For a correct evaluation, it is recommended to investigate 1000–5000 cells/microscopic slide/per tested sample, as well as in the control samples [,,]. Few authors reported the analysis of a larger number of cells (over 5000) [,,].
The most important cytogenetic parameters calculated based on microscopic observations are the mitotic index (MI) and the proportion of chromosomal abnormalities (CA). In some reported studies, in addition to these parameters, the index of each phase of mitosis (PI) is also calculated [,,,], as well as the limit value of cytotoxicity (LCV) [,,,]. The calculation formulas of these parameters are detailed in Figure 5.
Figure 5. Cytogenotoxic parameters for the Allium cepa model.
The mitotic index is a tool used to measure the percentage of dividing cells from each phase of mitosis out of the total cells observed in a microscopic sample. A correct identification of all phases of cell division in Allium cepa L. roots is essential. The mitotic cell division comprises regular phases such as prophase, metaphase, anaphase and telophase (see Figure 6). Interphase is a stage in which genetic material is replicated, which takes place over a longer period of the cell cycle compared to mitosis. The most numerous cells are found in the interphase.
Figure 6. Steps of mitosis in Allium cepa L. roots (images from own research).
Therefore, the number of cells analyzed under the microscope is important for calculating the mitotic index (MI) as accurately as possible. If, in the samples tested with different plant extracts, the MI value is high, this indicates intense cellular activity, and the tissue is actively growing, since it is not affected. If, on the contrary, the MI value is low (compared to the control sample), it indicates the inhibition of this parameter, which can be interpreted as cell death, a delay in the kinetics of cell proliferation, or cellular damage [], due to the cytotoxic or genotoxic effect of the plant extracts [,,,,]. The MI may vary in different roots of the same plant, but the average data are fairly stable []. Additionally, the reduced number of cells per division phase (PI) indicates an inhibitory effect on the division process due to tested extracts []. Some authors reported that, if the MI value decreases by 50% compared to the control, it is considered the limit value for cytotoxicity (LVC), but, if it drops below 22–25%, it can be lethal to organisms [,,,].
Chromosomal aberrations (CAs) are changes in the structure and number of chromosomes and can be observed in all stages of mitosis. The most remarkable cells can be highlighted; especially in anaphase and telophase, CAs appear in the form of chromosome bridges, chromosome losses and fragments, chromosome delays, disorganized and multipolar anaphases (star anaphase), and c-mitosis. A series of chromosomal aberrations can also be highlighted in the metaphase as a result of the expulsion of whole chromosomes from the metaphase plate, as well as chromosome breaks, chromosome fragments, and irregular metaphases []. Chromosomal aberrations are caused by the breakage of chromosome fragments, the unbalanced exchange of chromatid segments, or damage to the mitotic spindle.
Antiproliferative capacity and genotoxic potential on cell division in A. cepa L. of different plant extracts are due to the interaction of various chemical components, present in high concentrations, which cause inhibitory effects on the cell cycle [,]. Toxic substances can also affect interphase cells by blocking DNA and protein synthesis in the nucleus []. This is evidenced by the presence of micronucleus in interphase and prophase cells. The micronucleus has a similar structure but a reduced size compared to the main nucleus. In the interphase daughter cells, a series of nuclear abnormalities can be identified, such as lobulated nuclei, nuclei with nuclear buds, polynucleated cells or minicells.
Some types of chromosomal aberrations in Allium cepa L. roots induced by various cytotoxic and genotoxic agents are presented in Figure 7.
Figure 7. Different chromosomal aberrations in Allium cepa L. roots (images from own research).
Within the Allium cepa test, in addition to microscopic parameters, macroscopic parameters can be also measured []. The most important macroscopic parameter is the root growth length RGL (the average root length for each sample) []. Thus, the percentage of root growth inhibition in the tested extracts compared to the control can be calculated [,]. Additionally, the EC50 (effective concentration at which root growth is 50% of the control) can be calculated. Inhibition of root elongation greater than 20% was considered evidence of toxicity, based on standard phytotoxicity tests []. Other macroscopic root growth parameters, e.g., restriction of leaf growth, can also be evaluated to estimate the toxicity index (turgescence, consistency, color change, root tip shape, presence of swellings, hooks, twists, or necroses) [,,,,].
After centralizing the data, the results can be analyzed using various statistical methods such as chi-square (χ2) [,,,] or one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) [,] followed by Tukey’s test [,,], Bonferroni test [], etc.

4. Results of the Cytotoxic and Genotoxic Evaluation of Plant Extracts Using the Allium cepa Model: Literature Review

Early research from 1999 was found in the Web of Science database on the assessment of the cytotoxicity of plant extracts. Aqueous extracts of Allophylus edulis leaves obtained by decoction, a plant widely used in folk medicine in Argentina, were studied in terms of cytotoxicity and genotoxicity []. Yajía et al. reported an important decrease in the MI compared to the control, indicating a significant statistical correlation between the mitotic index (MI) and the root growth length (RGL) and chromosome aberrations (CAs).
After the 2000s, the number of researchers who started to use the Allium cepa model as a tool in the toxicological evaluation of plant extracts has continuously increased.
Table 1 presents the cytotoxic and genotoxic studies using Allium cepa assay on various plants.
Table 1. Application of the Allium cepa model for the evaluation of cytogenotoxic effects of plant extracts: literature review (in alphabetical order of plant material species).

5. Discussion

Most studies highlight that a gradual decrease in MI is significantly correlated with an increasing concentration of the tested extracts or with a longer exposure time, indicating the interference of plant extracts in the progression of the cell division cycle. Moreover, an increase in CA compared with the negative control sample may be detected in the highest concentrations.
The presence of cells with different chromosomal aberrations proves the clastogenic or aneugenic effects of some tested plant extracts [,,,,,]. As previously mentioned, clastogenic aberrations cause changes in the structure of chromosomes, which can be observed at all stages of mitosis, especially in the anaphase, telophase and metaphase of cell division. Plant extracts can induce physiological aberrations (stickiness, c-mitosis and stray chromosomes), which are more frequent than clastogenic aberrations (breaks and bridges) []. Thus, in numerous studies, the presence of cells with sticky chromosomes [,,,], anaphase–telophase with bridges [,,,,], laggard chromosomes [], disordered (irregular) anaphase–telophase chromosome fragments [,,,], vagrant chromosomes [,], c-mitosis [,,], binuclear cell [,,], and enucleated (ghost) cells [] was frequently detected.
Some extracts can also induce aneugenic changes (adhesion, subsequent segregation, multipolarity, chromosome loss) in A. cepa L. roots, causing variations in the number of chromosomes in the meristematic cells. The distinction between a clastogenic effect (damage to the structure of chromosomes) and an aneugenic one (a change in the number of chromosomes) can be made by analyzing the sizes of micronuclei that appear in prophase or interphase cells. If the micronuclei are large, this can be considered an aneugenic effect, since they are formed from entire chromosomes, and, if they are reduced in size, they only contain chromosome fragments [].
If both the MI and the CA percentages are significantly different in relation to the control at the concentrations tested, a usage warning can be made, revealing possible harmful effects on human health [,,,,]. If mild cytotoxicity with minor chromosomal aberrations is revealed, it demonstrates that the extracts in question are safe for consumption [,,,].
The cytotoxic and genotoxic effects of tested extracts can be related to the phytochemicals present in the species and to their synergetic effect [,]. The concentration of metabolites in the extracts can be influenced by the extraction method []. Thus, phytochemical screening and the quantification of bioactive compounds present in the tested crude extracts performed using various spectrophotometric methods are important [,,,]. Simultaneous tests of entire extracts as such, as well as of certain compounds from the extracts (e.g., citral and limonene from Citrus aurantiifolia essential oil), were reported by Fagodia et al. []. Often, in studies involving essential oils, the observed effects are explained on the basis of their main compounds. Pawlowski et al. [] state that, even though the major compound of the essential oils from Schinus molle and Schinus terebinthifolius is α-pinene, the results observed on cell division in onion meristematic cells may be due to both major and minor compounds, rather than a single compound, probably acting synergistically. The presence of monoterpenes or the combined synergistic effect of different monoterpenes in essential oils on the mitotic index of A. cepa L. has also been reported in other studies [,], without mentioning the specific action of a particular compound. In the study of Cavalcante et al. [], it was not the entire extract that was tested on onion roots, but rather 2-oleyl-1,3-dipalmitoyl-glycerol, a separate compound from Platonia insignis extract.
The findings of the studies showed that the level of cytogenotoxicity of plant extracts on onion meristematic cells can be influenced by several factors related to both the extraction process for the tested samples and the experimental conditions of the Allium test itself.
Parameters such as the plant material conditioning (state), solvent, temperature, time, and extraction method influence the content of extracts in active principles, which may lead to different results in terms of cytotoxicity and genotoxicity.
In the extraction process, the plant material (aerial part, leaf, stem, inflorescence, rhizome, bark, etc.) can be used both fresh [,,,,,] and dried, crushed [] or in powder form [,,]. Drying is carried out using classical methods (oven) or modern methods (freeze drying) [].
Concerning the solvent, water is the most frequently employed solvent, resulting in aqueous extracts either by infusion, decoction or maceration. Hot water is often used, but so is cold water [,]. The aqueous extracts (infusion, most often) are prepared as they would be made at home by the general population [,,,]. Studies are also reported on hydroalcoholic [,,,], methanolic [,,,,], hexanic [] or dichloromethane [] extracts. The essential oils obtained from various plants are also subjected to toxicological research using the Allium test [,,,,,,,,]. The cytotoxicity and genotoxicity effect of different concentrations of latex from Hancornia speciose or Jatropha curcas L. are reported [,].
Furthermore, in several studies, comparative cytotoxic and genotoxic evaluations are performed between aqueous extracts and alcoholic extracts [,,,,] or between aqueous extracts and essential oils [,,] from the same plant source.
The experimental conditions of the Allium test can vary. Usually, different concentrations/dilutions of the studied extracts are tested, and exposure can occur at different times.
Some studies reported that the onion roots were immersed directly in plant extracts without any dilution [,,,] or the tested concentrations were established according to doses that are recommended in alternative medicinal usage by the general public [].
In parallel with the Allium cepa assay, several studies analyze cytotoxicity using tests on animal cells (e.g., bone marrow of rat cells) [,,], human cells (e.g., lymphocytes) [], tumor cell lines [], and brine shrimp (Artemia salina) [,,]. There are some studies that report tests on different weeds [,,] to establish the phytotoxicity of the tested plant extracts. In addition to the A. cepa assay, recent research on Platonia insignis extracts has reported tests on different insects or aquatic crustaceans’ species []. Most often, the results concerning the toxicology of plant extracts using different kinds of tests are similar to those obtained with the Allium test.
Additionally, the examination of antigenotoxicity can establish the potential protective effect of plant extracts against alterations or mutations induced in the genetic material by various compounds. The antigenotoxic effect of some herbal extracts has been tested in relation to the genotoxicity induced by mutagenic substances such as hydrogen peroxide [,], methyl methanesulfonate [,] or lead nitrate [] on onion meristematic cells.

6. Conclusions

The side effects associated with the consumption of plants are essentially influenced by the dosage and frequency of their use. Since bioactive compounds and their interactions can lead to toxic effects, there is a constant need for scientific knowledge regarding the efficacy and safety of medicinal herbs. It is important to establish, with accuracy, what the ideal and safe concentrations are for the use of these plants.
The present review is intended as proof that the Allium cepa model constitutes an important cytogenetic tool in the process of evaluating the biosafety potential of herbal extracts. This plant-based assay allows for the detection of the possible cytotoxic and genotoxic effects induced on onion meristematic cells, as a prompt step in the evaluation process.
The Allium cepa model is not a perfect tool, presenting some limitations (Figure 8). Considering that plants extracts represent a complex mixture of biomolecules, it is difficult to establish the selective influence of each compound on cell division. Some of them may have cytotoxic and/or genotoxic effects, while others may possess cytoprotective and/or antigenotoxic properties. Moreover, the use of the test requires expertise in the correct visualization and interpretation of mitotic phases and chromosomal abnormalities. Based on the research reviewed, it most often emerged that, for a more in-depth study of the cytotoxicity of plant extracts, other tests must be performed, as a complement to the Allium test.
Figure 8. Advantages and limitations of the Allium cepa model.
Nevertheless, the Allium cepa bioassay is a successful test that is used because of its many advantages: simplicity in implementation, cheapness, high sensitivity, and reproducibility. Moreover, the results provided by this biomarker are in good correlation with other accessible systems like animals, cell lines, etc. The ecological significance of using this model, which can be considered environmentally friendly, must also be highlighted. The advantages of the Allium test are far greater than the disadvantages presented.
It is concluded that the Allium cepa test is a very convenient tool, especially in the preliminary screening of the cytotoxic and genotoxic effects of various plants frequently used in traditional medicine, from which aspects related to their biosafety potential can be established.

7. Future Directions

Although the Allium cepa test cannot completely replace other cytotoxicity tests, combining it with the analysis, identification and quantitative determination of bioactive compounds in the analyzed plant extracts could lead to clearer information about the causal compounds of the observed effects.
The application of the Allium cepa model, however, indicates significant scientific discoveries, and new adaptations of the test, as well as its standardization, could lead to countless possibilities for its use, avoiding other types of more laborious tests, including those on animals.
In recent years, cytotoxicity research has tended to use and develop sustainable testing systems such as the Allium cepa assay, with the aim of completely or partially replacing a large percentage of sophisticated experiments involving high costs and environmentally unfriendly methods.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, D.N., L.G., O.-I.P., R.-E.V. and I.-C.A.; methodology, D.N., L.G., O.-I.P., R.-E.V. and I.-C.A.; software, I.-C.A.; writing—original draft preparation, D.N., L.G., O.-I.P., R.-E.V. and I.-C.A.; writing—review and editing, D.N., L.G., O.-I.P. and I.-C.A.; visualization, D.N., L.G., O.-I.P., R.-E.V. and I.-C.A.; supervision, D.N. and I.-C.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. El Allaoui, H.; El Ahmadi, K.; El Abdouni, A.; Dira, I.; El Bastrioui, M.; Bouhrim, M.; Eto, B.; Shahat, A.A.; Herqash, R.N.; Haboubi, K. Trends and Insights in Medicinal Plant Extract Research: A Ten-Year Bibliometric and Visualization Study. Horticulturae 2024, 10, 1163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Proestos, C. The Benefits of Plant Extracts for Human Health. Foods 2020, 9, 1653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Almasri, R.S.; Bedir, A.S.; Al Raish, S.M. Comprehensive Ethnopharmacological Analysis of Medicinal Plants in the UAE: Lawsonia inermis, Nigella sativa, Ziziphus spina-christi, Allium cepa, Allium sativum, Cymbopogon schoenanthus, Matricaria aurea, Phoenix dactylifera, Portulaca oleracea, Reichardia tingitana, Salvadora persica, Solanum lycopersicum, Trigonella foenum-graecum, Withania somnifera, and Ziziphus lotus. Nutrients 2025, 17, 411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Srivastava, A.; Srivastava, P.; Pandey, A.; Khanna, V.K.; Pant, A.B. Phytomedicine: A Potential Alternative Medicine in Controlling Neurological Disorders. In New Look to Phytomedicine; Khan, M.S.S., Ahmad, I., Chattopadhyay, D., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 625–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Chaachouay, N.; Zidane, L. Plant-Derived Natural Products: A Source for Drug Discovery and Development. Drugs Drug Candidates 2024, 3, 184–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Soni, V.; Raizada, P.; Singh, P.; Cuong, H.N.; Saini, A.; Saini, R.V.; Le, Q.V.; Nadda, A.K.; Le, T.T.; Nguyen, V.H. Sustainable and green trends in using plant extracts for the synthesis of biogenic metal nanoparticles toward environmental and pharmaceutical advances: A review. Environ. Res. 2021, 202, 111622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Sarkar, A.; Sarkar, D.; Poddar, K. Plant metabolites as new leads to drug discovery: Approaches and challenges. In Medicinal Plants: Chemistry, Pharmacology, and Therapeutic Applications, 1st ed.; Swamy, M.K., Patra, J.K., Rudramurthy, G.R., Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2019; pp. 61–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Puri, V.; Nagpal, M.; Singh, I.; Singh, M.; Dhingra, G.A.; Huanbutta, K.; Dheer, D.; Sharma, A.; Sangnim, T. A Comprehensive Review on Nutraceuticals: Therapy Support and Formulation Challenges. Nutrients 2022, 14, 4637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Anywar, G.; Kakudidi, E.; Byamukama, R.; Mukonzo, J.; Schubert, A.; Oryem-Origa, H.; Jassoy, C. A Review of the Toxicity and Phytochemistry of Medicinal Plant Species Used by Herbalists in Treating People Living With HIV/AIDS in Uganda. Front. Pharmacol. 2021, 12, 615147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Hamidi, M.R.; Jovanova, B.; Panovska, T.K. Toxicological evaluation of the plant products using Brine Shrimp (Artemia salina L.) model. Maced. Pharm. Bull. 2014, 60, 9–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Ghica, A.; Tănase, M.L.; Niculițe, C.M.; Tocilă, A.; Popescu, L.; Luță, E.A.; Olaru, O.T.; Popovici, V.; Balaci, T.D.; Duțu, L.E.; et al. In Vitro Toxicity Evaluation of Some Plant Extracts and Their Potential Application in Xerosis cutis. Cosmetics 2024, 11, 124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Mulaszynska, J.; Juchimiuk, J. Plant genotoxicity: A molecular cytogenetic approach in plant bioassays. Arh. Hig. Rada Toksikol. 2005, 56, 177–184. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  13. Turkez, H.; Arslan, M.E.; Ozdemir, O. Genotoxicity testing: Progress and prospects for the next decade. Expert Opin. Drug Metab. Toxicol. 2017, 13, 1089–1098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Morozesk, M.; Bonomo, M.M.; Souza, I.D.C.; Rocha, L.D.; Duarte, I.D.; Martins, I.O.; Dobbss, L.B.; Carneiro, M.T.; Fernandes, M.N.; Matsumoto, S.T. Effects of humic acids from landfill leachate on plants: An integrated approach using chemical, biochemical and cytogenetic analysis. Chemosphere 2017, 184, 309–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Onisan, E.; Sarac, I.; Petolescu, C.; Horablaga, M.N.; Mate, C.; Simina, A.; Camen, D.; Ganea, M.; Ardelean, D.R.; Călugar, L.; et al. Application of the Allium Test in Toxicity Studies of Lead and Copper: A Cytological Perspective. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 1491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Şuţan, N.A.; Fierăscu, I.; Fierăscu, R.; Ionica, D.; Soare, L.C. Phytochemical analysis and in vitro assessment of Polystichum setiferum extracts for their cytotoxic and antimicrobial activities. Caryologia 2019, 72, 53–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Klein, P.; Chauvey, L.; Kallerhoff, J.; Pinelli, E.; Morard, M.; Silvestre, J. A Tool Derived from the Vicia faba Micronucleus Assay, to Assess Genotoxicity, Cytotoxicity or Biostimulation of Novel Compound used in Agriculture. Agronomy 2021, 11, 321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Palm, E.R.; Guidi Nissim, W.; Adamcová, D.; Podlasek, A.; Jakimiuk, A.; Vaverková, M.D. Sinapis alba L. and Triticum aestivum L. as biotest model species for evaluating municipal solid waste leachate toxicity. J. Environ. Manag. 2022, 302, 114012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Banti, C.N.; Hadjikakou, S.K. Evaluation of Genotoxicity by Micronucleus Assay In vitro and by Allium cepa test in vivo. Bio-protocol 2019, 9, e3311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Santos, C.L.V.; Pourrut, B.; Ferreira de Oliveira, J.M.P. The use of comet assay in plant toxicology: Recent advances. Front. Genet. 2015, 6, 216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Tedesco, B.S.; Laughinghouse, H.D., IV. Bioindicator of genotoxicity: The Allium cepa test. In Environmental Contamination; Srivastava, J.K., Ed.; IntechOpen Limited: London, UK, 2012; pp. 137–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Leme, D.M.; Marin-Morales, M.A. Allium cepa test in environmental monitoring: A review on its application. Mutat. Res. 2009, 682, 71–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Ciobanu, D.G. A Review About Phytotoxicity with a Focus on the Allium test. Biostudent 2019, 2, 65–74. Available online: https://cbg.uvt.ro/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/A-review-about-phytotoxicity-with-a-focus-on-the-Allium-testBIOSTUDENT_December2019_Ciobanu_65-74.pdf (accessed on 15 November 2024).
  24. Nicuță, D.; Grosu, L.; Alexa, I.-C.; Fînaru, A.-L. Sustainable Characterization of Some Extracts of Origanum vulgare L. and Biosafety Evaluation Using Allium cepa Assay. Horticulturae 2024, 10, 504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Grosu, L.; Ferenț, E.; Nicuță, D.; Alexa, I.-C. Approach regarding the biosafety evaluation of black and red currant pomace extracts using Allium cepa test. Ovidius Univ. Ann. Chem. 2024, 35, 126–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. de Melo, E.C.; da Silva Pinheiro, R.; Costa, B.S.; de Lima, R.M.T.; Dias, A.C.S.; de Jesus Aguiar dos Santos, T.; de Nascimento, M.L.L.B.; de Castro e Sousa, J.M.; Islam, M.T.; de Carvalho Melo Cavalcante, A.A.; et al. Allium cepa as a toxicogenetic investigational tool for plant extracts: A systematic review. Chem. Biodivers. 2024, 21, e202401406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Levan, A. The effect of colchicine on root mitoses in Allium. Hereditas 1938, 24, 471–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Grant, W.F. Chromosome aberration assays in allium: A report of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Gene-Tox Program. Mutat. Res. 1982, 99, 273–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Grant, W.F. The present status of higher plant bioassays for detection of environmental mutagens. Mutat. Res. 1994, 310, 175–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Fiskesjö, G. The Allium test as a standard in environmental monitoring. Hereditas 1985, 102, 99–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Fiskesjö, G. The Allium test—A potential standard protocol of assessment of environmental toxicity. In Environmental Toxicology and Risk Assessment; Gorsuch, J.W., Dwyer, F.J., Ingorsoll, C.G., La Point, T.W., Eds.; American Society for Testing and Materials: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 1993; Volume 2, pp. 331–345. [Google Scholar]
  32. Rank, J.; Nielsen, M.H. Evaluation of the Allium anaphase-telophase test in relation to genotoxicity screening of industrial wastewater. Mutat. Res. 1994, 312, 17–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Rasgele, P.G. The use of Allium cepa L. assay as bioindicator for the investigation of genotoxic effects of industrial waste water. Arch. Environ. Prot. 2021, 47, 3–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Iqbal, M.; Abbas, M.; Nisar, J.; Nazir, A. Bioassays based on higher plants as excellent dosimeters for ecotoxicity monitoring: A review. Chem. Int. 2019, 5, 1–80. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3407325 (accessed on 16 April 2025).
  35. Bonciu, E.; Firbas, P.; Fontanetti, C.S.; Wusheng, J.; Karaismailoğlu, M.C.; Liu, D.; Menicucci, F.; Pesnya, D.S.; Popescu, A.; Romanovsky, A.V.; et al. An evaluation for the standardization of the Allium cepa test as cytotoxicity and genotoxicity assay. Caryologia 2018, 71, 191–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Wijeyaratne, W.M.D.N.; Wadasinghe, L.G.Y.J.G. Allium cepa Bio Assay to Assess the Water and Sediment Cytogenotoxicity in a Tropical Stream Subjected to Multiple Point and Nonpoint Source Pollutants. J. Toxicol. 2019, 2019, 5420124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Cauich-Suárez, L.Y.; Sánchez-Sánchez, V.E.; Moreno-Ortiz, G.; Noreña-Barroso, E.; Rodríguez-Fuentes, G. Bioassays with Allium cepa for the Monitoring of Toxicity in the Groundwater of Yucatan, Mexico. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 11428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Sabeen, M.; Mahmood, Q.; Bhatti, Z.A.; Faridullah; Irshad, M.; Bilal, M.; Hayat, M.T.; Irshad, U.; Akbar, T.A.; Arslan, M.; et al. Allium cepa assay based comparative study of selected vegetables and the chromosomal aberrations due to heavy metal accumulation. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 2020, 27, 1368–1374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Taychew, A.; Kerisew, B. Assessment of Cytotoxicity and Genotoxicity Potential of Effluents from Bahir Dar Tannery Using Allium cepa. Adv. Public Health. 2022, 2022, 5519304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Wijeyaratne, W.M.D.N.; Wickramasinghe, P.G.M.U. Chromosomal Abnormalities in Allium cepa Induced by Treated Textile Effluents: Spatial and Temporal Variations. J. Toxicol. 2020, 2020, 8814196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Hassan, G.M.; Yassein, A.A.M. Cytogenotoxicity Evaluation of Water Contaminated with Some Textile Azo Dyes Using Rapd Markers and Chromosomal Aberrations of Onion (Allium cepa) Root Cells. Egypt. J. Genet. Cytol. 2014, 43, 39–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Mohammed, J.S.; Mustapha, Y.; Him, M.A.; Danladi, Z.N. Assessment of Cytogenotoxicity of Plastic Industrial Effluent Using Allium cepa Root Tip Cells. Int. J. Cell Biol. 2023, 2023, 5161017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Pathiratne, A.; Hemachandra, C.K.; De Silva, N. Efficacy of Allium cepa test system for screening cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of industrial effluents originated from different industrial activities. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2015, 187, 730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Datcu, A.-D.; Ciobanu, D.-G.; Boros, B.-V.; Ostafe, V.; Ianovici, N. A new approach for phytotoxicity testing using Allium cepa bulbs. Rom. Biotechnol Lett. 2020, 25, 1488–1494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Camilo-Cotrim, C.F.; Bailão, E.F.L.C.; Ondei, L.S.; Carneiro, F.M.; Almeida, L.M. What can the Allium cepa test say about pesticide safety? A review. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 48088–48104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Feretti, D.; Zerbini, I.; Zani, C.; Ceretti, E.; Moretti, M.; Monarca, S. Allium cepa chromosome aberration and micronucleus tests applied to study genotoxicity of extracts from pesticide-treated vegetables and grapes. Food Addit. Contam. 2007, 24, 561–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Kuchy, A.H.; Wani, A.A.; Kamili, A.N. Cytogenetic effects of three commercially formulated pesticides on somatic and germ cells of Allium cepa. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2016, 23, 6895–6906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Bianchi, J.; Fernandes, T.C.C.; Marin-Morales, M.A. Induction of mitotic and chromosomal abnormalities on Allium cepa cells by pesticides imidacloprid and sulfentrazone and the mixture of them. Chemosphere 2016, 144, 475–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Çıldır, D.S.; Liman, R. Cytogenetic and genotoxic assessment in Allium cepa exposed to imazalil fungicide. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 20335–20343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Rodríguez, Y.A.; Christofoletti, C.A.; Pedro, J.; Bueno, O.C.; Malaspina, O.; Ferreira, R.A.; Fontanetti, C.S. Allium cepa and Tradescantia pallida bioassays to evaluate effects of the insecticide imidacloprid. Chemosphere 2015, 120, 438–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Animasaun, D.A.; Adedibu, P.A.; Afolabi, S.O.; Abdulkareem, K.A.; Ibrahim, S.; Krishnamurthy, R. Hazard assessment and cytogenotoxic effect of different concentrations of mercury chloride sterilant using the Allium cepa assay. Discov. Toxicol. 2024, 1, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Khalil, A.M.; Salman, W.K.; Al-Qaoud, K.M. Preliminary evaluation of acute cytogenotoxicity of a novel phenylboronic acid derivative; 2- (bromoacetamido) phenylboronic acid using the Allium cepa chromosome aberrations assay. Caryologia 2016, 70, 34–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Das, D.; Mitra, P.K.; Gupta, S. Evaluation of cytotoxicity indiced by the anti-cancerous drugs doxorubicin and erlotinib in Allium cepa assay for eco-safety monitoring. Cytologia 2021, 86, 19–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Alias, C.; Feretti, D.; Viola, G.V.C.; Zerbini, I.; Bisceglie, F.; Pelosi, G.; Zani, C.; Aflatox group. Allium cepa tests: A plant-based tool for the early evaluation of toxicity and genotoxicity of newly synthetized molecules. Mutat. Res. Genet. Toxicol. Environ. Mutagen. 2023, 889, 503654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Diniz, J.S.; Souza-Silva, G.D.; De Souza, C.R.; De Paula Freitas, L.A.; Souki Parreira, A.L.; Rocha Pena, B.; Mol, M.P.G.; Silveira, M.R. Cytotoxicity, genotoxicity, and mutagenicity of the active pharmaceutical ingredient nevirapine and a nevirapine-based drug on the plant species Allium cepa. Ann. Environ. Sci. Toxicol. 2023, 7, 025–033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Bhuia, M.S.; Siam, M.S.H.; Ahamed, M.R.; Roy, U.K.; Hossain, M.I.; Rokonuzzman, M.; Islam, T.; Sharafat, R.; Bappi, M.H.; Mia, M.N.; et al. Toxicity Analysis of Some Frequently Used Food Processing Chemicals Using Allium cepa Biomonitoring System. Biology 2023, 12, 637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Rosculete, E.; Olaru, A.L.; Rosculete, C.A.; Bonciu, E. Assessment of cytological effects of food preservative potassium metabisulphite to Allium cepa. Am. J. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 11–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Tkachuk, N.; Zelena, L. An onion (Allium cepa L.) as a test plant. Biota. Hum. Technol. 2022, 3, 50–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Dragoeva, A.P.; Koleva, V.P.; Nanova, Z.D.; Kaschieva, M.Z. Allelopathy of cold water extracts from Origanum vulgare ssp. vulgare L. J. Agric. Chem. Environ. 2014, 3, 144–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Dragoeva, A.P.; Koleva, V.P.; Nanova, Z.D.; Kaschieva, M.Z.; Yotova, I.R. Allelopathic and cytotoxic activity of Origanum vulgare ssp. vulgare growing wild in Bulgaria. Chem. Bulg. J. Sci. Educ. 2014, 23, 914–924. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287350745 (accessed on 20 March 2025).
  61. Valente, P.M.; Valente, V.M.M.; Silva, M.C.; dos Reis, L.B.; Silva, F.D.; Praça-Fontes, M.M. Phytotoxicity and cytogenotoxicity of Dionaea muscipula Ellis extracts and its major compound against Lactuca sativa and Allium cepa. Biologia 2022, 77, 2975–2988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Felicidade, I.; Lima, J.D.; Pesarini, J.R.; Monreal, A.C.; Mantovani, M.S.; Ribeiro, L.R.; Oliveira, R.J. Mutagenic and antimutagenic effects of aqueous extract of rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis L.) on meristematic cells of Allium cepa. Genet. Mol. Res. 2014, 13, 9986–9996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Wierzbicka, M. An improved method of preparing onion bulbs for Allium test. Acta Soc. Bot. Pol. 1987, 56, 43–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Akinboro, A.; Bakare, A.A. Cytotoxic and genotoxic effects of aqueous extracts of five medicinal plants on Allium cepa Linn. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2007, 112, 470–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Aşkin Celik, T.; Aslantürk, O.S. Evaluation of Cytotoxicity and Genotoxicity of Inula viscosa Leaf Extracts with Allium Test. J. Biomed. Biotechnol. 2010, 2010, 189252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Chukwujekwu, J.C.; Van Staden, J. Cytotoxic and genotoxic effects of water extract of Distephanus angulifolius on Allium cepa Linn. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2014, 92, 147–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Ihegboro, G.O.; Alhassan, A.J.; Ononamadu, C.J.; Owolarafe, T.A.; Sule, M.S. Evaluation of the biosafety potentials of methanol extracts/fractions of Tapinanthus bangwensis and Moringa oleifera leaves using Allium cepa model. Toxicol. Rep. 2020, 7, 671–679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Owolarafe, T.A.; Salawu, K.; Ihegboro, G.O.; Ononamadu, C.J.; Alhassan, A.J.; Wudil, A.M. Investigation of cytotoxicity potential of different extracts of Ziziphus mauritiana (Lam) leaf Allium cepa model. Toxicol. Rep. 2020, 7, 816–821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Yuet Ping, K.; Darah, I.; Yusuf, U.K.; Yeng, C.; Sasidharan, S. Genotoxicity of Euphorbia hirta: An Allium cepa Assay. Molecules 2012, 17, 7782–7791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Kuhn, A.W.; de Freitas, J.M.B.; Funk, N.L.; de Oliva Araujo, L.C.; Frescura, V.; do Canto-Dorow, T.S.; da Silva, C.B.; Andriolo, J.L.; Hister, C.; Tedesco, S. Cytogenotoxicity of Basil (Ocimum basilicum ‘Basilicão’) by Allium cepa Test under Saline Stress Induction. Braz. Arch. Biol. Technol. 2024, 67, e24231031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Akinboro, A.; Baharudeen, I.; Mohamed, K. Evaluation of cytogenotoxic and antimutagenic potency of water extract of Centella asiatica Linn. using the Allium cepa assay. Int. Food Res. J. 2016, 23, 2449–2452. Available online: http://www.ifrj.upm.edu.my (accessed on 28 March 2025).
  72. Sabini, M.C.; Cariddi, L.N.; Escobar, F.M.; Bachetti, R.A.; Sutil, S.B.; Contigiani, M.S.; Zanon, S.M.; Sabini, L.I. Evaluation of Cytogenotoxic Effects of Cold Aqueous Extract from Achyrocline satureioides by Allium cepa L test. Nat. Prod. Commun. 2011, 6, 995–998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Dey, A.; Hazra, A.K.; Mukherjee, A.; Nandy, S.; Pandey, D.K. Chemotaxonomy of the ethnic antidote Aristolochia indica for aristolochic acid content: Implications of anti-phospholipase activity and genotoxicity study. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2021, 266, 113416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Dey, A.; Hazra, A.K.; Nandy, S.; Kaur, P.; Pandey, D.K. Selection of elite germplasms for industrially viable medicinal crop Bacopa monnieri for bacoside A production: An HPTLC-coupled chemotaxonomic study. Ind. Crops Prod. 2020, 158, 112975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Şuţan, N.A.; Fierăscu, I.; Fierăscu, R.C.; Manolescu, D.Ş.; Soare, L.C. Comparative analytical characterization and in vitro cytogenotoxic activity evaluation of Asplenium scolopendrium L. leaves and rhizome extracts prior to and after Ag nanoparticles phytosynthesis. Indust. Crops Prod. 2016, 83, 379–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Ouzid, Y.; Kaci-Boudiaf, M.N.; Zeghouini, A.; Madi, A.-O.; Smail-Saadoun, N.; Houali, K. Antimitotic and genotoxic effect of methanolic extracts of leaves of Peganum harmala L. on the meristematic cells of Allium cepa L. Bioagro 2023, 35, 97–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Souza, L.F.B.; Laughinghouse, H.D., IV; Pastori, T.; Tedesco, M.; Kuhn, A.W.; Canto-Dorow, T.S.; Tedesco, S.B. Genotoxic potential of aqueous extracts of Artemisia verlotorum on the cell cycle of Allium cepa. Int. J. Environ. Stud. 2010, 67, 871–877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Frescura, V.D.S.; Laughinghouse, H.D., IV; Tedesco, S.B. Antiproliferative effect of the tree and medicinal species Luehea divaricata on the Allium cepa cell cycle. Caryologia 2012, 65, 27–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  79. Han, C.; Shao, H.; Zhou, S.; Mei, Y.; Cheng, Z.; Huang, L.; Lv, G. Chemical composition and phytotoxicity of essential oil from invasive plant, Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2021, 211, 111879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Senna Pereira, J.; Aparecida Hister, C.; Ubessi, C.; Bosio Tedesco, S. Genotoxicity, Cytotoxicity and Phenolic Compounds from Aqueous Extracts of Phyllanthus tenellus Roxb. Cultivated Under Different Light Conditions. Pak. J. Biol. Sci. 2022, 25, 575–585. Available online: https://scialert.net/fulltext/?doi=pjbs.2022.575.585 (accessed on 6 July 2025).
  81. Ubessi, C.; Tedesco, B.S.; da Silva, C.B.; Baldoni, M.; Krysczun, D.K.; Heinzmann, B.M.; Rosa, I.A.; Mori, N.C. Antiproliferative potential and phenolic compounds of infusions and essential oil of chamomile cultivated with homeopathy. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2019, 239, 111907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Ikechukwu, E.C.; Agu, P.N.; Olumuji, H.B.; Anagboso, M.O.; Johnny, I.I.; Okokon, J.E.; Ebong, N.O. Evaluation of Genotoxic and Cytotoxic Activities of Three Vegetables (Heinsia crinata, Justicia insularis and Lasianthera africana) Using Allium cepa Test. Asian J. Biochem. Gen. Mol. Biol. 2024, 16, 10–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Okokon, J.E.; Osigwe, C.C.; Uwaeme, U.F.; Johnny, I.I.; Gabriel, J.; Udo, I.J. Evaluation of genotoxic and cytotoxic activities of Solenostemon monostachyus (P. Beauv.) Brig. (Lamiaceae) using Allium cepa test. Niger. J. Pharm. Appl. Sci. Res. 2025, 14, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  84. Santana, G.M.; Deus, M.S.M.; Sousa, J.M.C.; Ferreira, P.M.P.; Fernandes, H.B.; Peron, A.P. Antimitotic and antimutagenic action of the Hymenaea stigonocarpa bark on dividing cells. Braz. J. Biol. 2016, 76, 520–525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  85. Sharma, A.; Singh, H.P.; Batish, D.R.; Kohli, R.K. Chemical profiling, cytotoxicity and phytotoxicity of foliar volatiles of Hyptis suaveolens. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2019, 171, 863–870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Rossato, L.V.; Tedesco, S.B.; Laughinghouse, H.D., IV; Farias, J.G.; Nicoloso, F.T. Alterations in the mitotic index of Allium cepa induced by infusions of Pluchea sagittalis submitted to three different cultivation systems. An. Acad. Bras. Ciênc. 2010, 82, 857–860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. do Nascimento Cavalcante, A.; Lima, L.K.F.; Araújo, C.M.; da Silva Santos, F.P.; do Nascimento, M.O.; de Castro E Sousa, J.M.; Rai, M.; Feitosa, C.M. Toxicity, cytotoxicity, mutagenicity and in vitro antioxidant models of 2-oleyl-1,3-dipalmitoyl-glycerol isolated from the hexane extract of Platonia insignis MART seeds. Toxicol. Rep. 2020, 7, 209–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Alabi, O.A.; Atanda, H.C.; Olumurewa, J.A.V. Cytogenotoxicity of the aqueous extract of Parquetina nigrescens leaf using Allium cepa assay. Protoplasma 2022, 259, 1417–1425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Akarsha, B.; Krishnakumar, G. Genotoxic and antigenotoxic potential of the Lagenandra toxicaria Dalz. rhizome methanol extract using Allium cepa assay. Asian J. Pharm. Clin. Res. 2021, 14, 82–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Almeida, L.M.; Prado, A.D.; Xavier-Silva, K.R.; Firmino, M.T.; Paula, M.I.; Gomes, P.N.; Paula, J.A.; Bailão, E.F. Cytotoxic effect of Vernonanthura polyanthes leaves aqueous extracts. Braz. J. Biol. 2021, 81, 575–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Mesic, A.; Mahmutović-Dizdarević, I.; Tahirović, E.; Durmišević, I.; Eminovic, I.; Jerković-Mujkić, A.; Bešta-Gajević, R. Evaluation of toxicological and antimicrobial activity of lavender and immortelle essential oils. Drug. Chem. Toxicol. 2021, 44, 190–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Tóth, G.; Háhn, J.; Radó, J.; Szalai, A.D.; Kriszt, B.; Szoboszlay, S. Cytotoxicity and hormonal activity of glyphosate-based herbicides. Environ. Pollut. 2020, 265, 115027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Mercado, S.A.S.; Caleño, J.D.Q. Cytotoxic evaluation of glyphosate, using Allium cepa L. as bioindicator. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 700, 134452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Hister, C.A.; Laughinghouse, H.D.; da Silva, C.B.; Dorow, T.S.; Tedesco, S.B. Evaluation of the Antiproliferative Effect of Infusions and Essential Oil of Aloysia gratissima. Pak. J. Biol. Sci. 2009, 12, 1581–1584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Grondona, E.; Gatti, G.; López, A.G.; Sánchez, L.R.; Rivero, V.; Pessah, O.; Zunino, M.P.; Ponce, A.A. Bio-efficacy of the Essential Oil of Oregano (Origanum vulgare Lamiaceae. Ssp. Hirtum). Plant Foods Hum. Nutri. 2014, 69, 351–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Sangur, K.; Smith, A.; Tomasoa, M. The mitotic index of Cajanus cajan from Kisar island, in the Southwest of Maluku. Biosaintifika J. Biol. Biol. Educ. 2021, 13, 128–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Matagne, R. Duration of mitotic cycle and patterns of DNA replication in chromosomes of Allium cepa. Caryologia 1968, 21, 209–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Timothy, O.; Idu, M.; Olorunfemi, D.I.; Ovuakporie-Uvo, O. Cytotoxic and genotoxic properties of leaf extract of Icacina trichantha Oliv. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2014, 91, 71–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Bilonozhko, Y.; Shut, T.; Krupodorova, T.; Pirko, N.; Holubchak, O.; Pryvalikhin, S.; Lykholat, O.; Pirko, Y. Impact of aqueous extract of Viscum album on different organisms. Regul. Mech. Biosyst. 2023, 14, 432–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Gupta, S.; Kumar, A. Chromosomes and the mitotic cell cycle phase in onion roots. Int. Internal Med. J. 2023, 1, 224–228. [Google Scholar]
  101. Ria Das, R.; Goswami, S.; Ghosh, P.; Roy, S.; Ray, S. Cytotoxic and Cytostatic Effects of of Crinum asiaticum in Allium cepa Root Apical Meristem Cells. Cytologia 2022, 87, 107–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Yajía, M.E.; Martí, D.A.; Bidau, C.J.; Amat, A.G.; Riglos, A.G.; Silvestroni, A. Genotoxicity evaluation of Allophylus edulis (Camb.) Radlk. (Sapindaceae) aqueous extract. Acta Hortic. 1999, 501, 31–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Peron, A.P.; Mariucci, R.G.; de Almeida, I.V.; Düsman, E.; Manto-vani, M.S.; Vicentini, V.E. Evaluation of the cytotoxicity, mutagenicity and antimutagenicity of a natural antidepressant, Hypericum perforatum L. (St. John’s wort), on vegetal and animal test systems. BMC Complement Altern. Med. 2013, 13, 97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Vicentini, V.E.P.; Camparoto, M.L.; Teixeira, R.O.; Mantovani, M.S. Averrhoa carambola L., Syzygium cumini (L.) Skeels and Cissus sicyoides L.: Medicinal herbal tea effects on vegetal and animal test systems. Acta Sci. Agron. 2001, 23, 593–598. [Google Scholar]
  105. Üstündag, Ü.; Macar, O.; Kalefetoğlu Macar, T.; Yalcin, E.; Cavusoglu, K. Effect of Melissa officinalis L. leaf extract on manganese-induced cyto-genotoxicity on Allium cepa L. Sci. Rep. 2023, 13, 22110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Yekeen, T.A.; Azeez, M.A.; Lateef, A.; Asafa, T.B.; Oladipo, I.C.; Badmus, J.A.; Adejumo, S.A.; Ajibola, A.A. Cytogenotoxicity potentials of cocoa pod and bean-mediated green synthesized silver nanoparticles on Allium cepa cells. Caryologia 2017, 70, 366–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Schwarzacher, T.; Liu, Q.; (Pat) Heslop-Harrison, J.S. Plant Cytogenetics: From Chromosomes to Cytogenomics. In Plant Cytogenetics and Cytogenomics. Methods in Molecular Biology; Heitkam, T., Garcia, S., Eds.; Humana: New York, NY, USA, 2003; Volume 2672, pp. 3–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Eren, Y.; Özata, A. Determination of mutagenic and cytotoxic effects of Limonium globuliferum aqueous extracts by Allium, Ames, and MTT tests. Rev. Bras. Farmacogn. 2014, 24, 51–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Neves, C.S.; Gomes, S.S.L.; dos Santos, T.R.; de Almeida, M.M.; de Souza, Y.O.; Garcia, R.M.G.; Otoni, W.C.; Chedier, L.M.; Raposo, N.R.B.; Viccini, L.F.; et al. “Brazilian ginseng” (Pfaffia glomerata Spreng. Pedersen, Amaranthaceae) methanolic extract: Cytogenotoxicity in animal and plant assays. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2016, 106, 174–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Firbas, P.; Amon, T. Chromosome damage studies in the onion plant Allium cepa L. Caryologia 2014, 67, 25–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. de Sousa, W.C.; Paz, A.N.T.; Rocha, J.D.; da Conceição, E.C.; de Almeida, L.M.; Chen, L.C.; Borges, L.L.; Bailão, E.F.L.C. In vivo assessment of cyto/genotoxic, antigenotoxic and antifungal potential of Costus spiralis (Jacq.) Roscoe leaves and stems. An. Acad. Bras. Cienc. 2018, 90, 1565–1577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Lubini, G.; Fachinetto, J.M.; Laughinghouse, H.D., IV; Paranhos, J.T.; Silva, A.C.F.; Tedesco, S.B. Extracts affecting mitotic division in root-tip meristematic cells. Biologia 2008, 63, 647–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Bagatini, M.D.; Fachinetto, J.M.; da Silva, A.C.F.; Tedesco, S.B. Cytotoxic effects of infusions (tea) of Solidago microglossa DC. (Asteraceae) on the cell cycle of Allium cepa. Rev. Bras. Pharmacogn. 2009, 19, 632–636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Barman, M.; Roy, S.; Ray, S. Colchicine like metaphase and cell cycle delay inducing effects of leaf aqueous extract of Clerodendrum inerme L. Gaertn. in Allium cepa root apical meristem cells. Cytologia 2020, 85, 197–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Pawlowski, A.; Kaltchuk-Santos, E.; Brasil, M.C.; Caramão, E.B.; Zini, C.A.; Soares, G.L.G. Chemical composition of Schinus lentiscifolius March. essential oil and its phytotoxic and cytotoxic effects on lettuce and onion. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2013, 88, 198–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Narayanankutty, A.; Kuttithodi, A.M.; Alfarhan, A.; Rajagopal, R.; Barcelo, D. Chemical Composition, Insecticidal and Mosquito Larvicidal Activities of Allspice (Pimenta dioica) Essential Oil. Molecules 2021, 26, 6698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  117. Rathnasamy, S.; Kamaruzaman, B.M.; Sulaiman, S.F.; Akinboro, A. Evaluation of cytotoxic, mutagenic and antimutagenic potential of leaf extracts of three medicinal plants using Allium cepa chromosome assay. Int. Curr. Pharm. J. 2013, 2, 131–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Schreiner, G.E.; Eckert, G.L.; Schuster, M.F.; Baroni, S.; de Pelegrin, C.M.G.; Dartora, N. Cytotoxic and genotoxic effects of aqueous extracts of Aloysia gratissima (Gillies & Hook.) Tronc. using Allium cepa L. assay. Pharmacol. Res. 2024, 2, 100011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. de Sousa, M.A.A.; Silva, F.S.L.; Orlanda, J.F.F. Genotoxic and antiproliferative effects of Alpinia zerumbet (Zingiberaceae) essential oil in Allium cepa biotest. Ciênc. Nat. 2024, 46, e73445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Prajitha, V.; Thoppil, J.E. Genotoxic and antigenotoxic potential of the aqueous leaf extracts of Amaranthus spinosus L. using Allium cepa assay. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2016, 102, 18–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Sultan, A.O.; Çelik, T.A. Genotoxic and Antimutagenic Effects of Capparis spinosa L. on the Allium cepa L. Root Tip Meristem Cells. Caryologia 2009, 62, 114–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Fagodia, S.K.; Singh, H.P.; Batish, D.R.; Kohli, R.K. Phytotoxicity and cytotoxicity of Citrus aurantiifolia essential oil and its major constituents: Limonene and citral. Ind. Crops Prod. 2017, 108, 708–715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Roy, A.; Roy, S. Assessment of Cytotoxic Effects of Aqueous and Methanolic Leaf Extracts of Clerodendrum inerme (L.) Gaertn. and C. viscosum Vent. Using Allium Test. Cytologia 2019, 84, 73–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Annapurna, A.S.; Abhirami, D.; Umesh, T.G. Comparative study of phytochemicals and bioactivities of the leaf extracts of Curcuma amada and Curcuma karnatakensis. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2021, 142, 441–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Silva, D.S.B.S.; Barboza, B.; Garcia, A.C.F.S.; de Oliveira, B.; Estevam, C.S.; Neto, V.A.; Santos, A.L.L.M.; Dias, A.S.; Scher, R.; Pantaleao, S.M. Investigation of protective effects of Erythrina velutina extract against MMS induced damages in the root meristem cells of Allium cepa. Rev. Bras. Farmacogn. 2013, 23, 273–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Raheel, R.M.; Saddiqe, Z.; Iram, M.; Afzal, S. In vitro antimitotic, antiproliferative and antioxidant activity of stem bark extracts of Ficus benghalensis L. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2017, 111, 248–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Shilpa, K.J.; Gopi, K.P.; Muzhapravan, A.; Prabhakaran, K. Evaluation of cytotoxicity potential of Garcinia cambogia (Gaertn.) Desr. male flower extract using Allium cepa model. Adv. Pharm. J. 2023, 8, 136–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Akwu, N.; Naidoo, Y.; Singh, M. Cytogenotoxic and biological evaluation of the aqueous extracts of Grewia lasiocarpa: An Allium cepa assay. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2019, 125, 371–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Ribeiro, T.P.; Sousa, T.R.; Arruda, A.S.; Peixoto, N.; Gonçalves, P.J.; Almeida, L.M. Evaluation of cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of Hancornia speciosa latex in Allium cepa root model. Braz. J. Biol. 2016, 76, 245–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Lacerda, L.P.; Malaquias, G.; Peron, A.P. Antiproliferative action of aqueous extracts of Hymenaea stigonocarpa Mart. (Fabaceae) on the cell cycle of Allium cepa L. An. Acad. Bras. Ciênc. 2014, 86, 1147–1150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  131. da Silva, L.M.; de Sousa Carvalho, F.R.; Martins, L.; de Barros Fernandes, H.; Calou, I.B.F.; Peron, A.P. Antiproliferative effect of the hydroalcoholic extract of Hymenaea stigonocarpa Mart. ex Hayne (Fabaceae, Caesalpinioideae) on the cell cycle of roots of Allium cepa L. Biotemas 2015, 28, 45–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  132. Bidau, C.J.; Amat, A.G.; Yajía, M.; Martí, D.A.; Riglos, A.G. Silvestroni: Evaluation of the Genotoxicity of Aqueous Extracts of Ilex paraguariensis St. Hil. (Aquifoliaceae) Using the Allium Test. Cytologia 2004, 69, 109–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  133. Ciappina, A.L.; Ferreira, F.A.; Pereira, I.R.; Sousa, T.R.; Matos, F.S.; de Melo-Reis, P.R.; Goncalves, P.J.; Bailão, E.F.L.C.; Almeida, L.M. Toxicity of Jatropha curcas L. latex in Allium cepa test. Biosci. J. 2017, 33, 1295–1304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Eckert, G.L.; Smaniotto, T.A.; Dartora, N.; Pelegrin, C.M.G.; Baroni, S. The chemical composition of different leaf extracts of Lantana fucata Lindl. influences its cytotoxic potential: A study using the Allium cepa model. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2022, 289, 115003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Barman, A.; Ray, S. Mitotic Index Reduction and Cytotoxic Effects of Leaf Aqueous Extract of Maesa macrophylla (Wall.) A. DC. in Allium cepa Root Tip Cells. Cytologia, 2022; 87, 81–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Camparoto, M.L.; Teixeira, R.O.; Mantovani, M.S.; Vicentini, V.E.P. Effects of Maytenus ilicifolia Mart. and Bauhinia candicans Benth infusions on onion root-tip and rat bone-marrow cells. Genet. Mol. Biol. 2002, 25, 85–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Araújo, M.S.; Santos, S.P.; Barros-Filho, B.A.; Lima, M.M.O.; Leite, A.S. Toxicogenetic potential of Mimosa pigra (Fabaceae) infusion in Allium cepa meristematic cells. Genet. Mol. Res. 2020, 19, gmr18588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Raj, G.G.; Varghese, H.S.; Kotagiri, S.; Swamy, B.V.; Swamy, A.; Pathan, R.K. Pathan Anticancer Studies of Aqueous Extract of Roots and Leaves of Pandanus Odoratissimus f.ferreus (Y. Kimura) Hatus: An In Vitro Approach. J. Trad. Complement Med. 2014, 4, 279–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  139. Neves, E.S.B.; Ferreira, P.M.P.; Lima, L.H.; Peron, A.P. Action of Aqueous Extracts of Phyllanthus niruri L. (Euphorbiaceae) leaves on Meristematic Root Cells of Allium cepa L. An. Acad. Bras. Ciênc. 2014, 86, 1131–1136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  140. Macovei, I.; Luca, S.V.; Skalicka-Woźniak, K.; Sacarescu, L.; Pascariu, P.; Ghilan, A.; Doroftei, F.; Ursu, E.L.; Rimbu, C.M.; Horhogea, C.E.; et al. Phyto-Functionalized Silver Nanoparticles Derived from Conifer Bark Extracts and Evaluation of Their Antimicrobial and Cytogenotoxic Effects. Molecules 2022, 27, 217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Aşkin Çelik, T.; Aslantürk, O.S. Anti-mitotic and anti-genotoxic effects of Plantago lanceolata aqueous extract on Allium cepa root tip meristem cells. Biologia 2006, 61, 693–697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Sheela, A.; Thoppil, J.E. Evaluation of cytotoxicity of the aqueous leaf extract of Pogostemon heyneanus Benth. (Java Patchouli). Biotropia 2017, 24, 28–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Pereira, M.L.; Monteiro, C.N.; Siqueira, C.; Ribeiro, M.S.; Lopes, A.P.; Sousa, R.; Oliveira, M.; Júnior, J.; Martins, F.A.; Almeida, P.M. Evaluation of effects of Poincianella bracteosa (Tul.) L.P. Queiroz leaves in Allium cepa and Mus musculus. Biotech Histochem. 2020, 95, 464–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Teixeira, R.O.; Camparoto, M.L.; Mantovani, M.S.; Vicentini, V.E.P. Assesment of two medicinal plants Psidium guajava L. and Achillea millefolium L., in in vitro and in vivo assays. Genet. Mol. Biol. 2003, 26, 551–555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  145. Knoll, M.F.; Silva, A.C.F.; Tedesco, S.B.; Canto-Dorow, T.S. Effects of Pterocaulon polystachyum DC. (Asteraceae) on onion (Allium cepa) root-tip cells. Genet. Mol. Biol. 2006, 29, 539–542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Alves, S.F.; Gomes, C.M.; de Oliveira, M.G.; de Andrade, W.M.; Moreira, L.C.; Borges, L.L.; da Silva, C.C.; de Souza, G.O.; da Silva, V.B.; Valadares, M.C.; et al. Cytotoxicity, phagocytic activity, and leishmanicidal potential of extract standardized in geranylgeraniol obtained from the fruit of Pterodon emarginatus vogel. Pharmacogn. Mag. 2020, 16, 140–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Viel, A.M.; Silva, L.P.; Martins, G.R.; Urtremari, B.; Sekiya, A.; Dokkedal, A.L.; de Souza, E.B.; Camargo, I.C.; Silva, R.M. Toxicological, genotoxic and antioxidant potential of Pyrostegia venusta. Biosci. J. 2019, 35, 570–585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Cardoso, G.H.S.; Dantas, E.B.S.; Sousa, F.R.C.; Peron, A.P. Cytotoxicity of aqueous extracts of Rosmarinus officinalis L. (Labiatae) in plant test system. Braz. J. Biol. 2014, 74, 886–889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  149. Pawlowski, A.; Kaltchuk-Santos, E.; Zini, C.A.; Caramão, E.B.; Soares, G.L.G. Essential oils of Schinus terebinthifolius and S. molle (Anacardiaceae): Mitodepressive and aneugenic inducers in onion and lettuce root meristems. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2012, 80, 96–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Oyeyemi, I.T.; Bakare, A.A. Genotoxic and anti-genotoxic effect of aqueous extracts of Spondias mombin L., Nymphea lotus L. and Luffa cylindrica L. on Allium cepa root tip cells. Caryologia 2013, 66, 360–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Tom, A.; Job, J.T.; Rajagopal, R.; Alfarhan, A.; Kim, H.-J.; Kim, Y.O.; Na, S.W.; Narayanankutty, A. Thottea siliquosa (Lam.) Ding Hou leaf methanolic extract inhibits lipopolysaccharide-induced TLR4 activation and cytokine production as well as ethyl methyl sulfonate induced genotoxicity. Physiol. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2022, 117, 101772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Issa, M.; Chandel, S.; Singh, H.P.; Batish, D.R.; Kohli, R.K.; Yadav, S.S.; Kumari, A. Appraisal of phytotoxic, cytotoxic and genotoxic potential of essential oil of a medicinal plant Vitex negundo. Ind. Crops Prod. 2020, 145, 112083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.