Tea tree oil distilled from Melaleuca alternifolia has widespread use in the cosmetic industry as an antimicrobial as well as for other functions in topical products. Concerns were first raised by the European Commission's Scientific Committee on Consumer Products in 2004 about the level of the potentially carcinogenic phenylpropanoid compound methyl eugenol in tea tree oil. Limits on oil content in different types of cosmetic products were set based on a reported upper level of 0.9% methyl eugenol in the oil. A previous publication indicated that these levels were based on oil from a Melaleuca species not used in the commercial production of oil. Even the highest recorded levels in Melaleuca alternifolia, the overwhelmingly most common species used, were ∼15 times less than this, meaning that more oil could be safely used in the products. The current study, including details on methodology and reproducibility, extends that work across a suite of 57 plantation-sourced oils from a range of geographical locations and production years, as well as many Australian and international commercial oils. Lower levels of methyl eugenol in oils of known provenance were confirmed, with a recorded range of 160-552 ppm and a mean of 337 ppm. Analysis of variance showed methyl eugenol levels in Australian plantation oils to be correlated to the geographical region but not to the year of production. Average methyl eugenol levels in commercial oils were significantly lower, and these samples were divided into an authentic group and a group that were suspected of being adulterated based on an independent test. Authentic commercial oils had similar levels of methyl eugenol to Australian provenance material, whilst the oils classed as suspect had significantly lower levels.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
1
3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
1
3%
Other
4
11%
Unknown
26
68%
Attention Score in Context
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 February 2017.
All research outputs
#23,723,831
of 33,957,889 outputs
Outputs from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#6,900
of 11,119 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#309,074
of 465,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#71
of 164 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,957,889 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,119 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 465,964 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 164 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
