ArticleScientific reports2026
Comparative analysis of volatile composition and anticholinesterase activity of Egyptian Hedychium coronarium and Alpinia zerumbet using chemometric assessment of extraction techniques.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hedychium coronarium and Alpinia zerumbet are rhizomatous plants belonging to the family Zingiberaceae. They are rich in essential oils. Hydrodistillation and headspace (HS) were employed for the extraction of the essential oils from the leaves and rhizomes of both plants. Essential oils were then analysed by GC/MS and the obtained results were subjected to chemometric analysis. The oil samples obtained by hydrodistillation were tested for their antioxidant and anti-cholinesterase activities using oxygen radical antioxidant capacity assay and colorimetric inhibition kit, respectively. Hydro-distilled oil from H. coronarium leaves showed the presence of forty-seven compounds (97.73%) compared to sixteen compounds (99.17%) in the HS volatiles. Meanwhile, hydro-distilled oil from H. coronarium rhizomes showed the presence of thirty-nine components (95.84%) compared to fifteen compounds (98.68%) in the HS volatiles with 1,8-cineole (41.69% and 58.41%) as the major component in both samples. A. zerumbet leaves oil showed the presence of nineteen compounds (94.54%) in the hydrodistilled oil and twenty-one compounds (99.53%) in the HS volatiles. Besides, the rhizomes hydrodistilled essential oil showed twenty-three compounds (91.85%) and sixteen compounds (100%) in the HS with 1,8-cineole (20.78% and 23.63%) representing the major component in both samples. Chemometric analysis of the results provided a clear and statistically robust discrimination between the hydrodistilled and headspace-isolated oil samples demonstrating that extraction method is a primary determinant of volatile profile. Principal component analysis score plot explained 75% of total variance and distinctly separated samples into four main clusters with key discriminating components β-pinene, and caryophyllene were the major responsible for the segregation of H. coronarium leaves by headspace and hydrodistillation extraction methods, respectively, besides, 1,8-cineole accounted for the discrimination of H. coronarium rhizomes extracted by hydrodistillation. Hierarchial cluster analysis (HCA) fully supported this classification, confirming consistent grouping patterns across both analyses. Importantly, A. zerumbet oils from both extraction methods clustered closely, indicating compositional stability, whereas H. coronarium samples showed strong method-dependent divergence. A. zerumbet rhizomes oil showed the strongest activity as anticholinesterase with IC
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.