## 3 Results  
ROS Measurement in Control, Rotenone, and Rotenone along with Plant-Extract-Fed Groups in Wild-Type Oregon R\({}^{+}\)  
ROS generation in rotenone-exposed and rotenone cotreated with phytoconstituent groups: Figure 2 depicts the comparative fold changes in ROS generation in _Drosophila melanogaster_ larvae fed on the test chemical rotenone (ROT) and the control (no treatment) diet. When rotenone, a test chemical, was compared to the control, the largest fold change in ROS formation was seen (2.52-fold). In comparison to the control larvae, the third instar larvae's ROS generation increased after 24 h of exposure. The significance was ascribed at \(p\)-value \(\leq\) 0.05. Climbing Assay of Control, Rotenone, and Rotenone along with Plant-Extract-Fed Groups in Wild-Type Oregon R\({}^{+}\)  
The control flies (untreated) showed a maximal escape ability after 10 s compared to that of 0.05 ppm ROT and ROT with different plant extracts. ROT-fed flies (exposed for 5 days; 120 h) exhibited significant difficulty in the climbing assay, and only 11.5% of the flies were successful in crossing the mark of the apparatus compared to the control (92.3%). _Drosophila_ fed on test chemicals along with the plant extract showed a variable pattern in the climbing abilities of adult flies when compared to that of the control or rotenone-treated groups. Statistically significant improvement was evident in ROT + PG-p (4.80-fold increase), ROT + PG-P (4.75-fold increase), ROT + UD (3.88-fold increase), and ROT + FV (4.61-fold increase) compared to that of ROT-exposed flies. Interestingly, we did not observe statistically significant amelioration in the climbing activity of ROT + CP-P (2.15-fold increase)- and ROT + TFG (1.85-fold increase)-treated flies compared to the ROT-treated flies, although they showed some improvement in climbing ability (\(p<0.05\)). Altogether, different groups showed different percentages of improvement in climbing ability (Figure 3). Figure 3: Wild-type _D. melanogaster’s_ capability for climbing after 120 h. Rotenone, ROT; pomeramate peel, PG-P; pomeramate pulp, PG-P; papaya peel, CP-P; nettle leaves, UD; fennel, FV; fenugreek, TFG. All observations are expressed as the mean \(\pm\) SEM, n = 10, and were performed 3 times. Results were significant at \(p<0.05\). Significance was ascribed to \({}^{\star}p<\)0.05 compared to the control; \({}^{\#}p<0.05\) compared to rotenone. Figure 2: _Drosophila_ third instar larvae exposed to ROT and ROT cotreated with plant extract for only 24 h showed a relative fold shift in ROS production. ROS generation was examined in control, ROT, and ROT along with phytoextracts groups (pomeranate peel (PG-P), pomeranate pulp (PG-P), papaya peel (CP-P), nettle leaves (UD), fennel (FV), and fenugreek (TFG)). All observations are expressed as the mean \(\pm\) SEM, n = 3, with each group having 50 larvae per vial, and were performed 3 times. Significance was ascribed to \({}^{\star}p<0.05\) compared to the control; \({}^{\#}p<0.05\) compared to rotenone. Memory Assay of Drosophila Exposed to ROT and ROT Coteated with Plant Extract on Oregon R\({}^{+}\)  
Control adult flies (untreated) showed 96% memory retention. The differences in the control flies in achieving 100% memory retention could be attributed to their inherent ability to move, climb, and escape toward the light. Only 30% of the adult ROT-fed flies could memorize the offered dark condition, covering very little distance because they were moving too slowly to reach the target. Adult _Drosophila_ fed on test chemicals along with the plant extract showed variable memory improvement (food + dark) when compared to the control or rotenone-treated groups. Amazingly, we observed statistically significant (\(p<0.05\)) improvement in the memory retention of adult flies, with 100% memory retention in ROT + FV and ROT + TFG when compared to ROT alone.