Chemical composition and antioxidant activity of Jordanian <i>Artemisia judaica</i> L. as affected by different drying methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aerial parts of Artemisia judaica from Jordan were subjected to different drying methods, including shade (ShD), sun (SD), oven (OD) drying at different temperatures in addition to microwave drying (MWD). Essential oils extracted from these samples were assayed for their chemical composition and antioxidant activity. GC/MS analysis of the different oil samples revealed qualitative and quantitative differences. All samples contained high concentration levels of oxygenated monoterpenes (41.69%-68.56%) followed by esters (8.32–36.65%). The essential oil extracted from ShD plant material exhibited the strongest DPPH and ABTS radical scavenging activities while oil samples obtained from the SD method showed the strongest ferrous ion chelating activity (FIC). Cluster analysis (CA) and principal component analysis (PCA) were used to identify the effect of drying methods on the essential oil composition obtained from A. judaica. The different essential oils were classified into two clusters corresponding to natural and artificial drying methods.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".