Antifungal Properties of Essential Oils From Rosmarinus Officinalis, Citrus Aurantium, and Origanum Majorana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the prohibition of many chemical pesticides due to their impact on the health of living resources, as well as on the quality of food, soil and water, it has become essential to look for alternatives of natural origin that promote sustainability. This study focuses on the antifungal activity of Rosmarinus officinalis, Origanum majorana and Citrus aurantium essential oils against Phytophthora palmivora and Alternaria alternata. The antifungal activity of six essential oil concentrations was tested in vitro by the direct contact method. After a seven-day follow-up, the results revealed a significant antifungal effect of Origanum majorana essential oil, with total inhibition of mycelial growth at a concentration of 1.5 μl/ml and 3.33 μl/ml on Phytophthora palmivora and Alternaria alternata respectively. While Rosmarinus officinalis and Citrus aurantium showed less antifungal activity, with MICs ranging from 6.66 μL/mL to 12.5 μL/mL. These promising results pave the way for in vivo efficacy tests to confirm its use in more sustainable agricultural practices.
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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".