Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38268912›Full record

ArticleFood science & nutrition2024

Mixture design of α-pinene, α-terpineol, and 1,8-cineole: A multiobjective response followed by chemometric approaches to optimize the antibacterial effect against various bacteria and antioxidant activity.

Boutheina Ben Akacha, Monika Michalak, Ivana Generalić Mekinić, Miroslava Kačániová, Moufida Chaari, Faical Brini, Rania Ben Saad, Wissem Mnif, Stefania Garzoli, Anis Ben Hsouna

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Food science & nutrition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Study ofFrontiers in plant science · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Insight intoFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 8 institutions in 6 countries.

Boutheina Ben AkachaLaboratory of Biotechnology and Plant Improvement Centre of Biotechnology of Sfax Sfax Tunisia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5933-7423
Monika MichalakCollegium Medicum Jan Kochanowski University Kielce Poland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0471-3561
Ivana Generalić MekinićDepartment of Food Technology and Biotechnology, Faculty of Chemistry and Technology University of Split Split Croatia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1701-871X
Miroslava KačániováFaculty of Horticulture, Institute of Horticulture Slovak University of Agriculture Nitra Slovakia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4460-0222
Moufida ChaariLaboratory of Microbial Biotechnology and Engineering Enzymes (LMBEE) Center of Biotechnology of Sfax (CBS) University of Sfax Sfax Tunisia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1278-6456
Faical BriniLaboratory of Biotechnology and Plant Improvement Centre of Biotechnology of Sfax Sfax Tunisia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8435-381X
Rania Ben SaadLaboratory of Biotechnology and Plant Improvement Centre of Biotechnology of Sfax Sfax Tunisia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0559-0911
Wissem MnifDepartment of Chemistry, College of Sciences at Bisha University of Bisha Bisha Saudi Arabia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8123-4743
Stefania GarzoliDepartment of Chemistry and Technologies of Drug Sapienza University Rome Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8535-0533
Anis Ben HsounaLaboratory of Biotechnology and Plant Improvement Centre of Biotechnology of Sfax Sfax Tunisia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3837-5532
Centre of Biotechnology of Sfax · TNJan Kochanowski University · PLSapienza University of Rome · ITSlovak University of Agriculture in Nitra · SKUniversity of Bisha · SAUniversity of Monastir · TNUniversity of Sfax · TNUniversity of Split · HR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

α-Pinene, α-terpineol, and 1,8-cineole are compounds naturally present in essential oils, although their amounts vary from oil to oil. Although several studies have reported their antibacterial and antioxidant effects, there are few reports on the synergistic or antagonistic effects of their combinations. The objective of this study was to investigate the combined antibacterial effect of these three compounds. To our knowledge, this is the first report on the prediction of their optimal combination using the mixture design approach. The experimental antibacterial activity of the α-pinene, α-terpineol, and 1,8-cineole mixtures depended on the proportion of each compound in the mixture and the target strain, with minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) ranging from 0.31 to 1.85 mg/mL. Using the increased simplex-centroid mixture design, the mixture containing 0.33% of each molecule proved to be the most effective against

Indexed as

mixture designnatural componentspathogenic bacteriaprincipal component analysissynergistic effect

Identifiers

PMID38268912
PMCPMC10804091
OpenAlexW4388139208

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.