<i>Lavandula</i> Essential Oils: A Current Review of Applications in Medicinal, Food, and Cosmetic Industries of Lavender
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The global essential oil market has been steadily increasing in size over the past few years, and is estimated to reach ca. $7.5 billion USD per annum by 2018. Lavenders ( Lavandula; Lamiaceae) contribute significantly to this market, yielding ca. 1500 tons of essential oils which are primarily used in cosmetics, personal care products, and medicines. Recent literature indicates that these oils may also have applications in food preservation and pest control, among others. The medicinal and pharmaceutical properties of lavenders are chiefly due their essential oils, in particular the major essential oil constituents linalool and linalyl acetate, although certain activities have been attributed to the phenolic compounds. In addition, there is evidence that the major and minor essential oil constituents act synergistically to provide various biological effects. A substantial amount of current research focuses on evaluating the biological activities of lavender essential oils for potential use in traditional and complementary medicine, food systems, cosmetic and fragrance formulations, and insect control products. This review examines recent progress in these areas, and highlights the current and future implications for these economically and medicinally valuable plants.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".