That very much depends first of all how the plants are used traditionally. We have found in Peru that traditional preparations take very much into account what an extract is supposed to inhibit, and how toxic extracts potentially are. Healers used aqueous extracts for oral application against intestinal tract infections (E. coli, Salmonella sp. etc.) and ethanolic extracts for external applications e.g. wounds etc. (against Staphylococcus aureus etc.). The best is always to use both extraction methods. The aqueous extract can then be used directly. In the ethanolic extract simply evaporate the solvent, and reconstitute in water for your inhibition trial (to avoid any inhibitory effects of the ethanol itself).
That very much depends first of all how the plants are used traditionally. We have found in Peru that traditional preparations take very much into account what an extract is supposed to inhibit, and how toxic extracts potentially are. Healers used aqueous extracts for oral application against intestinal tract infections (E. coli, Salmonella sp. etc.) and ethanolic extracts for external applications e.g. wounds etc. (against Staphylococcus aureus etc.). The best is always to use both extraction methods. The aqueous extract can then be used directly. In the ethanolic extract simply evaporate the solvent, and reconstitute in water for your inhibition trial (to avoid any inhibitory effects of the ethanol itself).
The feature of using alcoholic extract goes for the greater extend the organic constituents may be effectively extracted in case of using aqueous extract. This can enhance the inhibition potency of the alcoholic extract compared to the aqueous one.