Australian Herbal Pharmacopoeia (working title), monograph AIP-PH-ALBLEB (formerly AIP-HP 016)
Date: 2026
Status: working document, version 1.0
Prepared by: the Australian Institute of Pharmacognosy, Far North Queensland, Australia. Every author and contributor is named at the end of the monograph.
0. Summary card, summary and contents
0.1 Identity card
| Field | Entry |
|---|---|
| Monograph | AIP-PH-ALBLEB (formerly AIP-HP 016), version 1.0 draft. Published 2026; next review due 2029, or sooner if a controlled trial of the bark reports |
| Title | Albizia bark (Albizia lebbeck (L.) Benth.), Albiziae lebbeck cortex |
| Accepted name | Albizia lebbeck (L.) Benth., Fabaceae (Leguminosae), order Fabales. Accepted in WCVP (checked in September 2026) and in the Australian Plant Census [1,2] |
| Plant part | Dried stem bark, whole or cut (Albiziae lebbeck cortex) |
| Principal synonyms | Mimosa lebbeck L. (basionym); Acacia lebbeck (L.) Willd.; Albizia latifolia Boivin; Mimosa sirissa Roxb.; Mimosa speciosa Jacq. [1]. Spelling variants, which are not separate names: Albizzia lebbeck (Ayurvedic Pharmacopoeia of India) and Albizia lebbek (Bone and Mills). MediHerb and the TGA Permissible Ingredients Determination use Albizia lebbeck [3,6,12,13] |
| Common names | Albizia, siris, Indian siris, siris tree, lebbeck, woman’s tongue, Broome rain tree; Sanskrit Śirīṣa; Hindi Siris; Tamil Vakai [3,4,16] |
| Status in pharmacopoeias | Ayurvedic Pharmacopoeia of India: yes, Part I, Vol. III, monograph 90, Śirīṣa (stem bark) [3]. Ph. Eur.: no monograph (8th Edition searched) [5]. BP, USP–NF, WHO, EMA/HMPC, BHP: no monograph traced |
| Australian status | Permissible Ingredients Determination item 436, ALBIZIA LEBBECK, purposes A and H, no specific requirements [6]. Not in the Poisons Standard [7]. APC: native and naturalised in WA, native in NT, naturalised in Qld [2]. Not prohibited or restricted matter under Queensland biosecurity law [8]. Not CITES-listed [9] |
| Named markers | None set by any pharmacopoeia. Identity by TLC zones at Rf 0.07, 0.21 and 0.63 in the Ayurvedic Pharmacopoeia of India system [3]. No assay marker or limit is proposed in this version (section 7) |
| Evidence snapshot | Asthma, bark decoction alone: Tier C, 1 single-arm study, 50 patients analysed, very low certainty [10]. Asthma, 11-herb confection made with the bark: Tier C, 1 two-arm study with no placebo, 52 analysed; formulation result, not carried over to the bark [11]. Allergic rhinitis, urticaria, atopic dermatitis: Tier T, practice and Ayurvedic use, no trial of the bark [3,12,13]; trials of a seven-herb product that contains it (Aller-7) have been identified but not yet read or graded (section 13.1). Mast-cell stabilising action: Tier P [13,14,31] |
| Suggested citation | Ridley T, Iggulden L. Albizia bark (Albizia lebbeck (L.) Benth.), Albiziae lebbeck cortex. Australian Herbal Pharmacopoeia (working title), AIP-PH-ALBLEB, version 1.0. Cardwell, QLD: AIP; 2026. DOI to be assigned |
| Provenance | Original AIP data: none. Every analytical figure, limit, method and trial result in this monograph comes from the cited sources. One AIP field photograph (iNaturalist observation 334799306, Burdell QLD, January 2026) illustrates foliage in section 3; its identification is provisional and it is not a voucher [15] |
| Compiler and review | Compiled by Dr Thomas Ridley (Education and Research). Technical review: Dr Fiona MacAllister (Botanical, sections 1-5, 10), reviewed in 2026; Dr Hana Suzuki (QA, sections 6-10), reviewed in 2026; Dr Eleanor Whitcombe (Medicine, sections 12, 13, 15), reviewed in 2026; evidence and citation audit of all references, figure sources and sections 11, 13, 14, 16 to 19 by Dr Thomas Ridley (Education and Research), reviewed in 2026; figure placement, captions, credit lines and page layout (Figures 1 to 18) by Jesse Kirby (Community Outreach), reviewed in 2026. Published: not yet. Last modified: 2026. Version 1.0 draft |
| Canonical URL | /pharmacopoeia/albizia-lebbeck/ (on publication) |

0.2 Summary
Albizia bark is the dried stem bark of Albizia lebbeck, a deciduous legume tree native to the Indian subcontinent and Myanmar and now planted and naturalised throughout the tropics, including northern Australia, where the Australian Plant Census treats the Kimberley and Top End populations as native and the Queensland ones as naturalised [1,2]. It is an official drug of the Ayurvedic Pharmacopoeia of India (Śirīṣa), which is the only pharmacopoeial standard for it: a thick, fissured, astringent bark with stone cells, crystal fibres and prismatic calcium oxalate, identified by a simple TLC system and held to ash and extractive limits [3]. No pharmacopoeia sets an assay. The bark contains tannins and flavan-3-ols and oleanane triterpenoid saponins; which of them, if any, carries the effect claimed for it is not known [3,14,16].
Australian practitioners use it for allergic conditions: hay fever, urticaria, eczema and asthma, usually alongside Baical skullcap [12,13]. That use rests on Ayurvedic tradition and on animal and in vitro work showing mast-cell stabilisation [13,14]. The human evidence is two uncontrolled or unblinded Indian studies in asthma, one of the bark decoction alone and one of a multi-herb confection, both at very low certainty [10,11]. At least two further registered trials of the confection in asthma are recorded as completed but have no report we could trace [32]. A 2026 "systematic review" that reports further trials fails our source check: its trial citations do not exist [17]. Rat studies show antispermatogenic effects of bark extracts and bark saponins, so the main safety question is male fertility, for which there are no human data [14,31].
0.3 Contents and extent
| Section | Pages (approx.) |
|---|---|
| 0 Summary card, summary, contents | 4 |
| 1 Nomenclature | 0.5 |
| 2 Definition | 0.5 |
| 3 Source and Australian supply, 3.1 origin and chemistry | 3 |
| 4 Macroscopy | 2 |
| 5 Microscopy | 2 |
| 6 Chemistry | 2 |
| 7 Named markers and assay limits | 0.5 |
| 8 TLC fingerprint | 1 |
| 9 HPLC fingerprint | 1 |
| 10 Identity, purity, adulterants, contaminants | 2 |
| 11 Traditional use | 0.5 |
| 12 Current practice, preparations and doses | 1.5 |
| 13 Clinical evidence | 4 |
| 14 Pharmacology | 1 |
| 15 Safety | 2 |
| 16–18 Discussion, conclusions, research needed | 3 |
| 19 References | 1 |
| 20 Document control | 1.5 |
Totals (approx.): 33 pages; 18 figures, of which 16 are images (9 photographs, botanical plates and a herbarium sheet; 7 AIP drawings, schematics and charts) and 2 are captioned placeholders; 0 photomicrographs and 0 chromatograms (both AIP bench data pending); 19 tables; 2 human studies graded; 2 sources excluded on the integrity screen; 33 references.
0.4 Contributors and access
Compiled by Dr Thomas Ridley, Head of Education and Research. Section reviews by Botanical (Dr Fiona MacAllister), QA (Dr Hana Suzuki) and Medicine (Dr Eleanor Whitcombe) are complete, the evidence and citation audit by Education and Research is done, and the layout review by Community Outreach (Jesse Kirby) is done; the Librarian and Legal reviews are pending. All are recorded in section 20. A preview of the monograph and all of section 15 (Safety) are free to every reader; the full text is for Scholar members and above, or the AUD $20 copy of this one title.
Free to every reader. The safety section of every monograph is open to everyone, signed in or not. In an emergency call 000. For poisoning, call the Poisons Information Centre on 13 11 26.
15. Safety
Reviewed and decided by Medicine (the AIP comments in this section are Medicine’s). No red flag for acute harm has been found. The main open question is male fertility, which rests on rat data and has never been studied in people.
From human studies. Yadav and colleagues report "no adverse effects/reactions" in 52 patients over 28 days of the confection [11]. Kumar and colleagues do not report on adverse events at all [10]. Two small, short studies without placebo cannot establish safety. They show only that nobody noticed serious harm.
Case reports. No published case report of harm from the bark was found in the PubMed searches in section 13.1.
TGA Database of Adverse Event Notifications (DAEN – medicines). Searched in September 2026 (data to 15/09/2026) by trade name or active ingredient [33]. "Albizzia" and "Shirish" match no medicine. "lebbeck" matches four listed multi-ingredient products containing Albizia lebbeck: Allerg-Eze; Allergy Care AUST L 207638 (with ascorbic acid, Perilla frutescens, quercetin, Rosmarinus officinalis and Scutellaria baicalensis); Metagenics Alergeze AUST L 294587 (with bromelains, Phyllanthus emblica, Piper longum, Piper nigrum and quercetin, among others); and Nyal Allergy & Hayfever Relief (with Scutellaria baicalensis). Together they carry 10 reports, 9 with that product as the single suspected medicine and none with death as an outcome. The 19 reaction terms are: drug ineffective 3; dizziness 2; pruritus 2; one each of diarrhoea, lip swelling, nausea, vomiting, feeling abnormal, inflammation, hepatitis, decreased appetite, headache, loss of consciousness, seizure, somnolence, urinary incontinence, dyspnoea, pharyngeal swelling and rash. The hepatitis report (case 516873, entered 18/01/2021, a woman of 66) names Allergy Care, which also contains Baical skullcap. No single-ingredient Albizia product appears. DAEN entries are unverified reports and establish no cause.
Causality (AIP comment). On the WHO-UMC scale every one of these reports is unassessable for A. lebbeck: each product has four or more actives, and DAEN publishes no dechallenge, rechallenge or timing details. The lip, pharyngeal swelling and dyspnoea terms read as possible hypersensitivity, which any multi-herb product can cause. The hepatitis and seizure reports are single reports, but they are serious terms and belong in the pharmacovigilance record.
TGA safety alerts. A search of the TGA website in September 2026 found no safety alert, product recall or advisory naming Albizia. The Database of Recalls, Product Alerts and Product Corrections was not searched directly (section 20).
Toxicology.
- Acute oral toxicity: an ethanol extract of the stem bark caused no deaths at 5 g/kg in a limit test in four female BALB/c mice, so the LD50 is above 5 g/kg; the same extract had a CC50 above 1000 µg/mL against HeLa cells [19].
- Braun and Cohen cite a median lethal dose of 150 mg/kg for a "methanolic fraction" of an extract (Kasture et al. 2000) [14,31]. Braun and Cohen describe that fraction as coming from an ethanolic extract of the leaves, and their summary gives no route, so the figure does not transfer to oral bark.
- Male fertility. Braun and Cohen report three rat studies by Gupta and colleagues [14,31]. Saponins isolated from the stem bark (albiziasaponins A–C, 50 mg/kg) reduced testis, epididymis, seminal vesicle and ventral prostate weights and sperm concentration and abolished fertility after 60 days (2005). An oral methanolic extract of the bark (100 mg a day for 60 days) reduced reproductive organ weights and sperm motility and density, again with a 100 per cent loss of fertility (2006). A methanolic pod extract arrested spermatogenesis (2004) [31]. The two bark papers are reported here from Braun and Cohen’s account; their full texts have been requested and are not yet read. There are no human data.
Contraindications, cautions and special groups (each with its source and grade):
| Group or situation | AIP position | Source | Grade |
|---|---|---|---|
| Men trying to father a child | Avoid. Braun and Cohen (2015) advise that men with low sperm counts or poor sperm motility avoid it when trying to father a child [31]; AIP extends this to any man trying to conceive, because the rat effect was complete loss of fertility and nothing is known of reversibility in humans | Rat studies [14,31]; practitioner text [31] | Tier P; precautionary |
| Pregnancy | Avoid. No reproductive toxicity study in females was found; the bark saponins are antispermatogenic in rats; MediHerb advises professional supervision [12]; Braun and Cohen record insufficient reliable information [14,31] | [12,14,31] | No data; precautionary |
| Lactation | Avoid unless a practitioner judges the need clear, under supervision. No data on transfer to milk or effect on the infant | MediHerb, professional supervision [12] | No data; precautionary |
| Children | No safety data. The one bark-only study enrolled patients from age 12 [10]; registered Shirishavaleha trials in children 6–16 have no published results (section 13.1) | [10] | No data |
| Older people | No data | none | No data |
| Surgery | Stop 7 days before general anaesthesia | MediHerb, a caution the guide applies to many liquids; no reason given [12] | Manufacturer caution |
| Asthma | Keep prescribed preventer and reliever treatment. In the bark-only study, patients who needed inhalers or steroids were removed from the analysis [10], so the study says nothing about using the bark in their place. Braun and Cohen advise that people with asthma be monitored [14,31] | [10,14,31] | AIP comment |
Herb–drug interactions. None has been observed clinically, and no pharmacokinetic interaction study exists.
| Drug | Possible effect | Grade | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Barbiturates | Additive sedation: potentiation of pentobarbitone sleeping time in animals | Theoretical (animal study) | Braun and Cohen [14,31] |
| Antihistamines, mast-cell stabilisers (cromoglycate) | Additive, possibly useful | Theoretical | Braun and Cohen [14,31] |
| SSRIs, tricyclic antidepressants | Serotonergic excess, from animal work showing raised brain serotonin | Theoretical; the animal work used leaf extracts | Braun and Cohen [14,31] |
MediHerb refers prescribers to its own herb–drug interaction chart for this herb [12]; that chart was not available to us.
Overdose. No reports.
Regulatory position. The Permissible Ingredients Determination attaches no specific requirement or label warning to ALBIZIA LEBBECK (item 436) [6]. The bark is not in the Poisons Standard [7].
Anyone considering Albizia bark, particularly a man planning a family, a woman who is pregnant or breastfeeding, a person with asthma, or anyone taking sedatives or antidepressants, should consult a degree-qualified herbalist with competencies and adequate training in pharmacognosy.
25 more pages follow · 12,712 words, 15 figures, 18 tables
Still to come in this monograph
- 1. Nomenclature
- 2. Definition
- 3. Source and Australian supply
- 3.1 Where it must be grown: origin, climate and chemistry
- 4. Macroscopy
- 5. Microscopy
- 6. Chemistry
- 7. Named markers and assay limits
- 8. TLC fingerprint
- 9. HPLC fingerprint
- 10. Identity, purity, adulterants and contaminants
- 11. Traditional use
- 12. Current practice: use, preparations and doses
- 13. Clinical evidence
- 14. Pharmacology
- 16. Discussion
- 17. Conclusions
- 18. Research still needed
- 19. References
- 20. Document control
The rest of this monograph is open to members. One membership covers every members’ feature on the site.
Checking your membership…
Report an error or submit evidence
If something in this monograph is wrong, out of date or missing, tell us and show us the evidence. Every report is logged under the AIP Evidence Charter and assessed on the evidence alone; the outcome is kept on the record, and an upheld report is corrected with a dated notice on this page.
Open the report form
The Institute sets and publishes its own monographs. The catalogue is in Publications.
