| Treatment |
White blood cell and differential white blood cell count |
| WBC (x103/µL) |
Neutrophils (x103/µL) |
Lymphocytes (x103/µL) |
Eosinophils (x103/µL) |
Monocytes (x103/µL) |
Basophils (x103/µL) |
| Control Oral |
14.34 ± 3.48 |
4.46 ± 1.26 |
7.27 ± 1.68 |
1.35 ± 0.41 |
1.15 ± 0.21 |
0.09 ± 0.08 |
| Acacia niloticaOral |
13.53 ± 5.98 |
3.70 ± 1.68 |
7.45 ± 3.22 |
1.27 ± 0.55 |
1.06 ± 0.55 |
0.04 ± 0.09 |
| Control IP |
6.87 ± 0.71 |
2.18 ± 0.25 |
3.51 ± 0.33 |
0.59 ± 0.14 |
0.54 ± 0.13 |
0.04 ± 0.04 |
| Acacia niloticaIP |
6.74 ± 2.19 |
1.82 ± 0.65 |
3.74 ± 1.22 |
0.61 ± 0.21 |
0.53 ± 0.14 |
0.03 ± 0.05 |
|
| Results are expressed as Mean ± Standard Deviation (SD) for five animals in each treatment; *p<0.05 is considered significant when the mean of the control animals issignificantly different from that of the extract treated animals by T-Test. |
| Table 5: The effects of oral and intraperitoneal administration of 1g/kg body weight of aqueous stem bark extracts of Acacia nilotica in mice for one month on differentialwhite blood cell count (WBC). |
