## 3 Results and Discussion
### Antimicrobial Analysis
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Solvent**} & \multicolumn{8}{c}{**Inhibition Zone Diameter (imm)**} \\ \cline{2-13}  & **St** & **Ef** & **Ec** & **Pa** & **Ec** & **Ss** & **Sp** & **Bs** & **St** & **Kp** & **Sa** & **Pv** & **Sm** \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Essential**} & \multirow{2}{*}{NA} & \multirow{2}{*}{2.5 a **} & \multirow{2}{*}{NA} & \multirow{2}{*}{2.5 a **} & \multirow{2}{*}{NA} & \multirow{2}{*}{2.5 a  } & \multirow{2}{*}{NA} & \multirow{2}{*}{2.5 a  } & \multirow{2}{*}{-5 a  } & \multirow{2}{*}{-5 a  } & \multirow{2}{*}{-5 a  } & \multirow{2}{*}{-5 a  } & \multirow{2}{*}{-5 a  } & \multirow{2}{*}{-0.02 a  } & \multirow{2}{*}{-0.02 a  } & \multirow{2}{*}{-0.02 a  } & \multirow{2}{*}{-0.02 a  } & \multirow{2}{*}{-0.02 a  } \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Positive** **control**} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.01 b  } & \multirow{2}{*}{0.01 b  } & \multirow{2}{*}{NA} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.01 b  } & \multirow{2}{*}{-0.01 b  } & \multirow{2}{*}{-0.01 b  } & \multirow{2}{*}{-0.01 b  } & \multirow{2}{*}{0.01 b  } & \multirow{2}{*}{0.01 b  } & \multirow{2}{*}{0.01 b  } & \multirow{2}{*}{0.01 b  } & \multirow{2}{*}{0.01 b  } & \multirow{2}{*}{0.01 b  } & \multirow{2}{*}{0.01 b  } & \multirow{2}{*}{0.01 b  } & \multirow{2}{*}{0.01 b  } \\ \hline \multicolumn{13}{c}{**The bacteria are denoted thus by: St (_Salmonella typhimurium_), Ef (_Enterococcus faecalis_), Ec (_Escherichia coli_), Pa (_Pseudomonas aeruginosa_), Be (_Bacillus cereus_), Sc (_Shigella somtei_), Sp (_Streptococcus pyogenes_), Bs (_Bacillus subtilis_), Sf (_Shigella flexneri_), Kp (_Kleb pneumoniae_), Sa (_Staphylococcus aureus_), Pv (_Proteins vulgaris_) and Sm (_Serratia marcescens_). Data expressed as means \(\pm\) SD; \(n=3\); values along a row with different subscripts are significantly different (\(p\leq 0.05\)). NA indicates not active.  
\end{table} 
Table 3: Inhibition zone diameters caused by the essential oil (50 mg/mL) in the tested opportunistic fungi. Although compounds in the oil are known to have antimicrobial activity independently, they could be acting independently or in combination to potentiate the plants' potentials [24]. Therefore, it is crucial to isolate and elucidate the bioactive compounds and determine their pharmacological properties. This should facilitate the identification of novel antimicrobial agents. GC-MS analysis of the essential oil fraction revealed fraction revealed the presence of 67 compounds in different chemical classes including terpenoids, aldehydes, ketones, fatty acid esters and carboxylic acids (Table 5). The details of certain compounds could, however, not be confirmed in the NIST database. Among identified compounds, carboxylic acids, dominated by \(n\)-Hexadecanoic acid and _cis_-9-hexadecanoic acid, constituted the largest group of compounds (30.68% of total oil composition). The higher content of carboxylic acids in the essential oil, compared to other groups of compounds, is an unusual finding, as most other essential oils reportedly contain terpen and other hydrocarbons. The results of this study, however, bear a similarity to those observed for the composition of essential oils from _Tetrapleura tetratetra_ Udourioh and Etkudoh, [25], who also reported a high content of carboxylic acids in the oil. Terpenoids identified in the oil made up 10.70% of the total oil composition. They included Beta-Myrcene, \(o\)-limonene, Terpien-4-ol, pulegone, Beta-bisabolene, (\(-\))-spathulenol, _cis_-lancoel, alloaromadendrene, Longifolene, Phenanthrene, 7-ethenyl-1,2,3,4,4a,4b,5,6,7,8,8a,9-dodecahydro-1,1,4b,7-tetramethyl-, [4 aS-(4a.alpha.,4b.beta., 7.alpha.,8a.alpha. )]- and Bicyclo [2.2.1] heptan-2-one, 1,7,7-trimethyl-, (1S)-Bicyclo. Aldehydes (4.86%); Ketones (2.85%) and fatty acid esters (1.82%) were also among compounds whose identity was confirmed from the library.