MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415671916 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0331767

Essential oil fractions of hemp profiles at different hydro-distillation periods

2025· article· en· W4415671916 on OpenAlexaff
Valtcho D. Zheljazkov, Vladimir Sikora, Tess Astatkie, Ivayla Dincheva, Milica Aćimović, Jelena Visković, Dragana Latković, Jay S. Noller

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersOregon State University
KeywordsEssential oilDistillationElutionGradient elutionChemical composition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The hypothesis of this study was that hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) essential oil (EO) constituents from high-cannabinoid hemp are eluted at different times during the hydro-distillation process, allowing the generation of fractions with distinct chemical profile, with or without cannabinoids. The objective was to reveal changes in the compositional profile of EO fractions captured at ten sequential distillation timeframes (DT) and a control. Regression analysis was conducted to model the relationship between DT and 20 EO compounds, classified in four groups (monoterpenes, sesquiterpenes, cannabinoids, and others (acid esters, ketone, alcohol)) using ten DT values (5, 10, 20, 40, 80, 120, 160, 200, 240, and 280 min). The results showed that most of the EO compounds were eluted early in the distillation process, until 10 min, then the EO compounds gradually decreased until 120 min and decreased to negligible amounts after 160 min DT. Monoterpenes eluted early in the distillation process, accounting for 69.79% of the total EO collected during the 0-5 min distillation interval. After that, the monoterpenes gradually decreased to 13.77% in the 240-280 min DT, while their concentration in the 0-180 min non-stop distillation was 33.55%. Conversely, the sesquiterpenes were eluted late in the distillation process. The concentration of sesquiterpenes in the 0-5 min DT EO was 25.73%, then gradually increased to reach a plateau at 160-280 min DT (75.3-76.8%), while their concentration in the 0-180 min DT was 54.4%. The results demonstrated that hemp EO with higher concentration of monoterpenes and free of cannabinoids can be obtained by separating the initial fractions, while hemp EO with higher concentration of sesquiterpenes and cannabinoids such as cannabidiol (CBD), cannabichromene (CBC), δ8-tetrahydrocannabinol (commonly known as δ8-THC), and δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (commonly known as δ9-THC or dronabinol) can be obtained by capturing the fraction eluted after 160 min DT.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research→French-language works237,207→