MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379422224 · doi:10.3390/separations10060344

Phytochemistry and Biological Activities of Essential Oils from Satureja calamintha Nepeta

2023· article· en· W4379422224 on OpenAlexaff
Rajae El Brahimi, Azeddin El Barnossi, Abdelfattah El Moussaoui, Mohamed Chebaibi, Rabie Kachkoul, Asmae Baghouz, Hiba‐Allah Nafidi, Ahmad Mohammad Salamatullah, Mohammed Bourhia, Amina Bari

Bibliographic record

VenueSeparations · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEssential Oils and Antimicrobial Activity
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersKing Saud University
KeywordsDPPHAntimicrobialPulegoneAspergillus nigerNepetaSaturejaBiologyFusarium oxysporumEssential oilTraditional medicineFood scienceBotanyChemistryMicrobiologyAntioxidantBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Satureja calamintha nepeta (S. calamintha) has a history of successful use in the treatment of bacterial and fungal diseases. The present study was designed to investigate the chemical composition and antioxidant and antimicrobial activities of essential oils extracted from wild S. calamintha (EOSS) and domesticated S. calamintha (EOSD) for comparison purposes. Hydrodistillation was used to extract the essential oils (EOs), while GC/MS was used for chemical analysis. Antioxidant activity was studied using DPPH and FRAP assays. Antifungal activity was performed against Candida albicans, Aspergillus niger, Aspergillus flavus, and Fusarium oxysporum), while antibacterial activity was tested against clinically resistant bacteria, namely Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, Bacillus subtilis, and Proteus mirabilis. By using ab=n in silico approach, the antioxidant and antimicrobial activities of the main compounds of EOSS and EOSD were also investigated. The yields obtained of EOSS and EOSD were 2.80% and 1.95%, respectively, with a dominance of eucalyptol, pulegone and rotundifolone. Concerning the antioxidant power, the IC50 values recorded by the use of the DPPH assay were in the range of 23.03 ± 4.30 and 24.09 ± 4.38 μg/mL for EOSS and EOSD, respectively, while by using the FRAP assay, the EC50 values were in the range of 55.38 ± 2.16 and 60.72 ± 7.71 μg/mL for EOSS and EOSD, respectively. Importantly, both essential oils of EOSS and EOSD exhibited good antibacterial activity against all studied bacteria; notably, the inhibition zone ranged from 14 ± 0.00 to 48.67 ± 1.15 mm and the MICs ranged from 0.37 ± 0.00 to 5.96 ± 0.00 µg/mL. Similarly, the studied EOs showed important antifungal activities compared to all the studied fungi, wherein the inhibition percentage ranged from 47.33 ± 1.15 to 89.18 ± 0.75%, while the MICs ranged from 0.18 ± 0.00 to 2.98 ± 0.00 µg/mL. The molecular docking results showed that piperitenone and pulegone strongly inhibited human acetylcholinesterase, whereas (+)-Isomenthone and piperitenone strongly inhibited S. aureus nucleoside diphosphate kinase, and E. coli beta-ketoacyl-[acyl carrier protein] synthase, respectively. The outcome of this article suggests that EOs of S. calamintha can be developed as alternative agents to manage drug-resistant phenomena and free radical issues.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeparationsSame topicEssential Oils and Antimicrobial ActivityFrench-language works237,207