Chemical composition and stability of the hydrosol obtained during the production of essential oils. III. The case of Myrica gale L., Comptonia peregrina (L.) Coulter and Ledum groenlandicum Retzius.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The chemical composition of the oils and hydrosols of Myrica gale, Comptonia peregrina, and Ledum groenlandicum collected from wild plantations in the Grondines region of the province of Quebec, Canada, were determined by GC/FID and GC/MS analyses. The composition of the oil of M. gale shows great variations from one country to another, both qualitatively and quantitatively. Same variations seem to occur also in the C. peregrina oil. The components obtained from the hydrosols were mainly monoterpene alcohols, aldehydes and ketones and as such the compositions of the hydrosols are very different of the corresponding oils: the oil with the most important percentage of hydrocarbon compounds, the compositions of the two phases are different. It appears that in some cases the composition of hydrosols at room temperature may change over a two year period of storage. The L. groenlandicum hydrosol is relatively stable except that the main compound, p-mentha-1(7), 8-dien-1-ol undergoes a trans- to cis- isomerization process meanwhile both cis- and trans-p-mentha-2, 8-dien-1-ol disappear during the shelf-life study. Possible hydration processes may occur in the hydrosol during the shelf-life.
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".