AIM OF THE REVIEW: This paper aimed to provide a critical review of current scenario on K. galanga. This review provides a current data on diversity, phytochemistry, pharmacological activities and traditional uses of K. galanga.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The information and data on K. galanga were collated from various resources like ethnobotanical textbooks and literature databases such as PubMed, Science Direct, Wiley, Springer, Tailor and Francis, Scopus, Inflibnet, Google and Google Scholar.
RESULTS: The forty-nine phytochemicals including esters, terpenoids, flavonoids, thiourea derivatives, polysaccharides, diarylheptanoids, phenolic acids, phenolic glycoside and cyclic lipodepsipeptide have been hitherto isolated and characterized. The major bioactive compounds extracted from the rhizome of K. galanga were ethyl p-methoxycinnamate, ethyl cinnamate, kaempferol, kaempferide, kaempsulfonic acids, kaemgalangol A, xylose, cystargamide B and 3-caren-5-one. Various studies demonstrated that the K. galanga and its constituents possess several pharmacological activities like antimicrobial, antioxidant, amebicidal, analgesic, anti-inflammatory, anti-tuberculosis, anti-dengue, anti-nociceptive, anti-angiogenic, anticancer, hyperlipidemic, hypopigmentary, osteolysis, larvicidal, insecticidal and mosquito repellent, nematocidal, sedative, sniffing, vasorelaxant and wound healing.
CONCLUSION: Kaempferia galanga L. is a valuable medicinal plant which is used traditionally in India to treat a wide variety of ailments. A number of bioactive phytochemicals like esters, terpenoids, flavonoids, polysaccharides, diarylheptanoids, cyclic lipodepsipeptide, phenolic acids and glucoside have been isolated from the rhizomes of K. galanga by several researchers. These phytochemicals are highly bioactive and exhibit various pharmacological activities.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred and ten students completed a validated questionnaire on SOC and SDLR. The percentage of marks obtained by these students in their year-end examination was used as their academic performance. The SOC scores were further divided into three hierarchical clusters using cluster analysis. The data were analyzed to determine the difference in the SDLR scores and academic performance among the three clusters. Furthermore, the relationship between SOC scores, SDLR scores, and academic performance was assessed.
RESULTS: The SDLR scores significantly increased from the low SOC cluster to the high SOC cluster (P = 0.026). However, there was no significant change in academic performance. A positive relationship was found between the SOC and the academic performance (R = +0.025; P > 0.05). The SDLR had a significant positive relationship with both SOC and academic performance (R = +0.27; P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Although SOC may not have a direct influence on academic performance, SDLR can play an intermediary role. Early identification and timely intervention in students with a weak SOC and low SDLR can have a beneficial influence on their academic life.