Chemotyping of diverse<i>Eucalyptus</i>species grown in Egypt and antioxidant and antibacterial activities of its respective essential oils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The chemical composition of the essential oil from the leaves of Eucalyptus camaldulensis, Eucalyptus camaldulensis var. obtusa and Eucalyptus gomphocephala grown in northern Egypt was analysed by using GC-FID and GC-MS techniques. The antibacterial (agar disc diffusion and minimum inhibitory concentration methods) and antioxidant activities (2,2'-diphenypicrylhydrazyl) were examined. The main oils constituents were 1,8-cineole (21.75%), β-pinene (20.51%) and methyleugenol (6.10%) in E. camaldulensis; spathulenol (37.46%), p-cymene (17.20%) and crypton (8.88%) in E. gomphocephala; spathulenol (18.37%), p-cymene (19.38%) and crypton (16.91%) in E. camaldulensis var. obtusa. The essential oils from the leaves of Eucalyptus spp. exhibited considerable antibacterial activity against Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. The values of total antioxidant activity were 70 ± 3.13%, 50 ± 3.34% and 84 ± 4.64% for E. camaldulensis, E. camaldulensis var. obtusa and E. gomphocephala, respectively. The highest antioxidant activity value of 84 ± 4.64% could be attributed to the high amount of spathulenol (37.46%).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".