Novel β-Cyclodextrin and Catnip Essential Oil Inclusion Complex and Its Tick Repellent Properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cyclodextrin inclusion complexes have been successfully used to encapsulate essential oils, improving their physicochemical properties and pharmacological effects. Besides being well-known for its effects on cats and other felines, catnip (Nepeta cataria) essential oil demonstrates repellency against blood-feeding pests such as mosquitoes. This study evaluates the tick repellency of catnip oil alone and encapsulated in β-cyclodextrin, prepared using the co-precipitation method at a 1:1 molar ratio. The physicochemical properties of this inclusion complex were characterized using GC-FID for encapsulation efficiency and yield and SPME/GC-MS for volatile emission. Qualitative assessment of complex formation was done by UV-Vis, FT-IR, 1H NMR, and SEM analyses. Catnip oil at 5% (v/v) demonstrated significant tick repellency over time, being comparable to DEET as used in commercial products. The prepared [catnip: β-CD] inclusion complex exerted significant tick repellency at lower concentration of the essential oil (equivalent of 1% v/v). The inclusion complex showed that the release of the active ingredient was consistent after 6 h, which could improve the effective repellent duration. These results demonstrated the effective tick repellent activity of catnip essential oil and the successful synthesis of the inclusion complex, suggesting that β-CDs are promising carriers to improve catnip oil properties and to expand its use in repellent formulations for tick management.
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) | 0.000 | 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".