ArticleScientific reports2024
Phytochemical characterization of forest leaves extracts and application to control apple postharvest diseases.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Graph-based pangenomics reveals the genetic basis of agronomic traits in tomato fruits.Horticulture research · 2026Article
- Mechanistic and applied insights into antifungal action of essential oils and phytochemical extracts againstFrontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- In Vitro Efficacy ofMicroorganisms · 2025Article
- Investigating the chemical composition and antifungal effect of Cinnamomum cassia essential oil against Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Acremonium sp.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study investigated the antifungal and phytochemical properties of three forest plants (Eucalyptus globulus, Pistacia lentiscus, and Juniperus phoenicea) against apple diseases caused by Colletotrichum gloeosporioides and Alternaria alternata. The determination of the total polyphenol and flavonoid contents in the three aqueous extracts of studied plants showed that E. globulus exhibited the highest contents than those of P. lentiscus and J. phoenicea. Furthermore, the three studied extracts showed very appreciable antioxidant activity with decreasing order: E. globulus, P. lentiscus, and J. phoenicea. The phytochemical analysis showed different common phenolic acids in the three studied plants namely: quinic acid, gallic acid, chlorogenic acid, and caffeoylquinic acid as well as other flavonoids mainly quercetin and catechin. The results of the current study demonstrated that the fungistatic activity of E. globulus EO (4 and 2 µl/ml) seemed to be the most effective under laboratory conditions with an inhibition zone diameter above 16 mm. However, the poisoned food technique indicated that the aqueous extract (80%) and the essential oil (4 µl/ml) of E. globulus exhibited the highest mycelial growth (> 67%) and spore germination (> 99%) inhibition. Preventive treatments with essential oils (4 µl/ml) and aqueous extracts (80%) applied to apple fruits inoculated with A. alternata and C. gloeosporioides resulted in the lowest lesion diameter (< 6.80 mm) and disease severity index (< 15%) and the most favorable inhibitory growth (> 85.45%) and protective potentials (> 84.92%). The results suggest that E. globulus has a brilliant future in the management of anthracnose and Alternaria rot of apple and provide a basis for further studies on its effects under field conditions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.