Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41441134›Full record

ReviewGels (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Essential Oils and Cultural Heritage Conservation: Are They Safe, Environmentally Friendly, Sustainable, and Negligibly Toxic?

Daniela Pinna

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Gels (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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

1 author.

Daniela PinnaIndependent Researcher, Bologna, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-7096-2817

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Microbial colonization of heritage materials is a well-known conservation issue. When necessary, it is removed using mechanical, physical, or chemical methods, with biocide formulations being a common choice. The need to reduce dependence on conventional biocides has led to the exploration of innovative alternative methods and new formulations with biocidal properties for the conservation of heritage objects. Alternative approaches include natural compounds such as plants' essential oils. While these natural options show promise, they present challenges-such as inconsistent effectiveness, possible toxicity, and the need for thorough compatibility testing with historic materials. Therefore, although some concerns are legitimate, the "run" to alternative substances is a growing concern as well. A comprehensive selection and examination of international research articles from the past two decades on this subject has been conducted. The detailed and critical analysis of existing data on essential oils, hydrolates, and other plant-derived extracts studied to prevent and/or eradicate the colonization of microbial communities on heritage objects focused on the effect on microorganisms in controlled environments, in situ applications on microorganisms, encapsulation in hydrogels and emulsions, toxicity and ecological impact, and alterations of heritage materials. The review also discusses the advantages, limitations, and practical implications of these strategies.

Indexed as

control of microbial colonizationcultural heritage objectsefficiencyenvironmental impactessential oilshydrolatestoxicity

Identifiers

PMID41441134
PMCPMC12733239

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.