Chemical composition and antibacterial activity of <i>Tussilago farfara</i> (L.) essential oil from Quebec, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The chemical composition of Tussilago farfara L. essential oil from the Saguenay-Lac-St-Jean region of Quebec, Canada was analyzed by gas chromatography–flame ionisation detector (GC-FID) and gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC-MS), and the antibacterial activity of the oil was tested against Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus. Forty-five (45) compounds were identified from the GC profile. The main components were 1-nonene (40.1%), α-phellandrene (26.0%) and ρ-cymene (6.6%). The essential oil demonstrated antibacterial activity against E. coli (MIC50 = 468 µg·mL−1; MIC90 = 6869 µg·mL−1) and S. aureus (MIC50 = 368 µg·mL−1; MIC90 = 773 µg·mL−1). Dodecanoic acid was found to be active against both bacteria having a MIC50 and MIC90 of 16.4 µg·mL−1 and 95 µg·mL−1, respectively for E. coli and a MIC50 and MIC90 of 9.8 µg·mL−1 and 27.3 µg·mL−1, respectively for S. aureus. In addition, 1-decene and (E)-cyclodecene were also found to be active against E. coli.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".