Allelopathic Activity and Chemical Analysis of the Essential Oil of Croton limae A. P. S. Gomes, M. F. Sales & P. E. Berry (Euphorbiaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The allelopathic activity and chemical composition of the essential oil of Croton limae A. P. S. Gomes, M. F. Sales & P. E. Berry (marmeleiro-prateado) have been evaluated in this study. The essential oil was extracted by hydro-distillation. A completely randomized design was used to test the influence of the essential oil from fresh leaves of C. limae in concentrations of 0.10%, 0.25%, 0.50%, 0.75%, 1%, 1.25%, 2.50%, 3.75%, and 5% on the germination and growth of Lycopersicum esculentum Mill. (tomato) seeds by indirect contact, with a control using water and dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO). Each treatment consisted of five replicates using twenty seeds in each one. The chemical analysis of the essential oil was carried out using gas chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry. The analysis showed the occurrence of 14 chemical compounds, the majority of which were cedrol (28.4%), eucalyptol (17.4%) and a-pinene (13.8). The C. limae essential oil inhibited germination of the tomato seeds at concentrations of 2.50% and upwards and it affected the caulicles and radicles of tomatoes at all concentrations tested. The tests proved that C. limae presents phytotoxic activities.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".