Skip to content
WikiAromatics

Plants · Precious Woods

Amyris balsamifera (Rutaceae): oil of amyris

Amyris balsamifera L.

Family
Rutaceae

Species

BinomialAmyris balsamifera
Accepted nameAmyris balsamifera L.
WCVP statusaccepted
FamilyRutaceae
IPNI identifierurn:lsid:ipni.org:names:12146-2

Source: Govaerts R. (ed.), World Checklist of Vascular Plants (WCVP), Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, accessed on 21/09/2026.

Which oils did the two studies analyse?

In the list of essential oils of Kačániová et al. (2020, Table 8), the part given for Amyris balsamifera L. (common name “amyris”, family Rutaceae) is “crushed wood”. According to the same article, the essential oil of Amyris balsamifera L. was obtained by steam distillation of crushed wood. The essential oils of that study, including the one of Amyris balsamifera L., were “produced in Slovakia” and used “in original packaging”. Abd Algaffar et al. (2024) included in their study two essential oils not stemming from Santalum L. species but “marketed under related denominations”, among them the oil of Amyris balsamifera (Rutaceae), designated “West Indian sandalwood Oil”. In Table 6 of the same study (“Origin of all EOs tested in this study”), the oil coded Ess-EO6, named “West Indian “SW””, has Amyris balsamifera as its “Plant of Origin”.

How did Kačániová et al. (2020) analyse their oil?

Kačániová et al. (2020) analysed the oils by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry following an earlier method of the authors “with a slightly modified version”, with separation on an HP-5ms capillary column. The relative content of each identified compound was calculated by dividing its peak area by the total area of all peaks; peaks under 1% were not counted, and each sample was measured “in triplicate”. According to the note to Table 1, the components listed are those that represented at least 1%, and the values are means of three determinations (maximum relative standard deviation ± 5%).

What did Kačániová et al. (2020) measure in their oil?

Kačániová et al. (2020) identified 15 chemical components at 1% or more each in the Amyris balsamifera L. essential oil they analysed.

Compound names below are written as Table 1 writes them.

In Table 1 (HP-5ms column, n = 3), “Amorpha-4,11-diene” (retention time 24.20 min) accounts for 2.58% of the components. In the same table, “β-cadinene” (25.04 min) accounts for 1.33% of the components. In the same table, “Dihydroagarofuran” (26.43 min) accounts for 1.53% of the components. In the same table, “β-dihydroagarofuran” (26.56 min) accounts for 1.05% of the components. In the same table, “α-zingiberene” (27.06 min) accounts for 2.21% of the components. In the same table, “Cedrene” (28.72 min) accounts for 4.91% of the components. In the same table, “α-curcumen” (28.89 min) accounts for 2.44% of the components. In the same table, “Nerolidol” (35.64 min) accounts for 1.57% of the components. In the same table, “Elemol” (39.25 min) accounts for 9.62% of the components. In the same table, “β-eudesmol” (39.75 min) accounts for 1.13% of the components. In the same table, “γ-eudesmol” (40.50 min) accounts for 2.49% of the components. In the same table, “Guaiol” (40.94 min) accounts for 19.40% of the components. In the same table, “10-epi-γ-eudesmol” (41.75 min) accounts for 14.80% of the components. In the same table, “Valerianol” (43.16 min) accounts for 23.20% of the components. In the same table, “Drim-7-en-11-ol” (50.65 min) accounts for 1.84% of the components.

How did Abd Algaffar et al. (2024) analyse their oils?

Abd Algaffar et al. (2024) carried out their analyses on a GC-QTOF MS system (a gas chromatograph coupled to a quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometer), with two column systems: DB-5 (system A) and DB-HeavyWax (system B).

What did Abd Algaffar et al. (2024) measure in sample Ess-EO6?

According to the authors’ analyses on the WAX column, the most abundant constituents (">10%") of the Amyris balsamifera oil they studied are valerianol, γ-eudesmol and β-eudesmol, constituting 21, 11 and 12% of it. The authors write that the two “non-Santalum” oils of the study, including the one of Amyris balsamifera, “did not contain any detectable amounts of the santalols”. In Table 4, the row “(Z)-Santalols (%)” carries “0.0” for sample Ess-EO6 (column “A. balsamifera”), as a percentage of the total peak area of the WAX chromatograms. Table 4 lists “The 26 most abundant components in S. album oils” (S. album: Santalum album L.), and its “total (%)” row for these 26 compounds carries 3.7 for sample Ess-EO6 (column “A. balsamifera”), as a percentage of the total peak area of the WAX chromatograms: a total of these 26 compounds, not of the oil. In the same table, “β-bisabolene” accounts for 0.7% of the total peak area of the WAX chromatogram in sample Ess-EO6. In the same table, “α-curcumene” accounts for 2.0% of the total peak area of the WAX chromatogram in sample Ess-EO6. In the same table, “(E)-nerolidol” accounts for 0.7% of the total peak area of the WAX chromatogram in sample Ess-EO6. In the same table, “(2E,6E)-farnesol” accounts for 0.3% of the total peak area of the WAX chromatogram in sample Ess-EO6. The authors write that their analyses of the Amyris balsamifera oil identified 7-epi-α-eudesmol “at around 7%”; the sentence gives neither the column nor the basis of this percentage.

Do the two studies give the same values?

The values below are set side by side as each study gives them; this page neither averages nor explains them, and keeps each compound name as its source writes it.

For β-eudesmol, Table 1 of Kačániová et al. (2020) gives 1.13% of the components (HP-5ms column, n = 3). For γ-eudesmol, the same table gives 2.49% of the components. For the oil they studied, Abd Algaffar et al. (2024) give 12% β-eudesmol and 11% γ-eudesmol, according to their analyses on the WAX column.

Which ISO standards name amyris oil?

In the ISO catalogue for ICS 71.100.60, ISO 3525:2008 is titled “Oil of amyris (Amyris balsamifera L.)”, falls under ISO/TC 54 and is at stage 90.93. In the same copy of the catalogue, ISO 3525:1979, “Oil of amyris”, is marked “Withdrawn”, at stage 95.99, and falls under ISO/TC 54.

References

Continue exploring