MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391641054 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0294126

Chemical profile of Juniperus excelsa M. Bieb. essential oil within and between populations and its weed seed suppression effect

2024· article· en· W4391641054 on OpenAlexaff
İvanka Semerdjıeva, Valtcho D. Zheljazkov, Ivayla Dincheva, Tzenka Radoukova, Tess Astatkie, Vasilina Maneva, Д. Atanasova, Hafize Fidan, Stanko Stankov, Albena Stoyanova

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAllelopathy and phytotoxic interactions
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersBulgarian National Science Fund
KeywordsEssential oilSteam distillationBotanyChemotypealpha-PineneLimonenePopulationBiologyHorticultureWeedAvena fatuaChamaecyparisCupressaceaePollen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aims of this study were to (1) establish the intrapopulation and seasonal variation of Juniperus excelsа essential oil (EO); (2) compare the J. excelsa concrete and resinoid composition with its EO composition; and (3) investigate the potential herbicidal activity of J. excelsa EO against seeds of Papaver rhoeas L., Consolida orientalis (J.Gay) Schrödinger, Anthemis arvensis L., Avena fatua L., and Agrostemma githago L. Four independent studies were performed to meet these objectives. Twenty-eight individual trees were analyzed from two populations to establish intrapopulation and interpopulation variability of EOs yield and composition. In the seasonal dynamic study of leaf EO, samples from the same three trees and in the same population were collected in January, March, May, July, October, and December and their EO yield and composition determined. The EOs (intrapopulation and seasonal) were extracted by hydrodistillation, while the EO for the herbicidal test was obtained by steam distillation in a semi-commercial (SCom) apparatus. Overall, the EO yield varied significantly from 0.93% to 2.57%. α-Pinene (8.85-35.94%), limonene (11.81-50.08%), and cedrol (3.41-34.29%) were the predominant EO compounds in all samples (intrapopulation variability); however, trans-2,4-decadienol and β-caryophyllene were predominant in some individual trees. Four chemical groups were identified in the samples collected from two natural populations (intrapopulation). This is the first report on the compositions of J. excelsa concrete and resinoid. Cedrol (15.39%), 7-hydroxy-4-methyl-coumarin (17.63%), 1-octacosanol (36.85%), tritriacontane (16.08%), and tiacontanoic acid were the main compounds in the concrete and resinoid. Juniperus excelsa EO suppressed seed germination and seedling growth of P. rhoeas, C. orientalis, A. arvensis, A. fatua, and A. githago, demonstrating its potential to be used for the development of new biopesticides. The highest EO yield with high content of limonene and cedrol was obtained from samples harvested during the winter months (December, January, and March).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.143

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicAllelopathy and phytotoxic interactionsFrench-language works237,207