Nature’s Gift profile

Nature’s Gift · PRODUCT EVIDENCE

Lemon Myrtle

Botanical name not captured · Source checked Sep 7, 12:07 AM UTC

What the supplier lists

Captured product claims; report identity is shown separately below.

Product source ↗
Origin
Not captured
Plant part
Not captured
Extraction method
Not captured
Chemotype
Not captured
Read supplier product description

This tree is plantation grown on an organically certified farm, and produces the purest natural form of citral in the world. A sweet lemon scent, used in perfumery, aromatherapy, and in cooking. An extremely potent antibacterial and germicide, Lemon Scented Myrtle Oil is a much more effective germ killer than the more familiar Tea Tree. Anecdotal evidence shows a much lower than expected number of coughs, colds and sinus problems in households that regularly diffuse the oil in an aromalamp. It makes a lovely winter oil, with its combination of a cheerful lemon scent and its proven germicidal activity. Anecdotal evidence from a friend who has been testing this oil in Australia: Over the last 8 months, three different homes have been using Lemon Myrtle oil in common oil burners—two to three drops only—with the following results: Definite reduction in colds and flu symptoms. Reduction in sinus problems. One has suffered for years (he’s also wheel-chair-bound due to a football accident when much younger), and is now a confirmed “addict” to Bc oil. Happier, sweeter smelling houses—“What is that beautiful smell” type reactions. Reduction in moths and silverfish and other creepy crawlies in clothes cupboards. (The whole leaf can be used in a similar way—a couple in each drawer—seems to be particularly efficient in the bathroom drawers.) None of these people are related to me, so have not had to bribe them them to say “good things” about Bc!! Lemon Myrtle Essential Oil is wonderful for oily skin and acne. The distiller recommends a drop dabbed neat on zits, however, the oil has not gone through extensive testing so we do not know if it is a potential sensitizer. It is a skin irritant, so I would not advise using it undiluted. I would dip a cotton ball in distilled water and add one drop of the Lemon Myrtle, and then touch THAT to the zit. Many oils are classed as “lemon” oils because of their aroma. Lemon oil itself is cold-pressed from lemon peel and is actually less “lemony” than many other oils because it contains only 3–10% of citral, the best known of the lemon scent components. Lemon myrtle, by contrast, contains 95% citral. I do not enjoy most “lemon-scented” oils. I am not a fan of lemongrass for example because it seems to lack the clarity of true lemon. This Lemon Myrtle is exquisite; as clear and clean as any lemon I have experienced. Anecdotal evidence from Australian aromatherapists, who have tested Lemon Myrtle indicate that it can be effective for relieving chest congestion whether diffused or in a massage blend. It also seems useful for relaxation, uplifting emotions, and soothing sleep. Lemon Myrtle’s extraordinarily high level of citral should make it a powerful antibacterial, antiseptic, and antifungal agent. I like to add a few drops to the diffuser just to generally clear the air in our house. The distiller states that Lemon Myrtle Essential Oil has many culinary uses. The pure essential oil is best suited to: Vinaigrettes mayonnaise

Size / optionSKUSupplier's listed priceAvailabilityProduct link
From price; choose size on supplier site43d65016393833fa9c3b790981c5e62eUSD 20.00in stockBuy this option ↗
Prices retain their published currency. Shipping and tax may be additional.Confirm availability and batch with the supplier.

LEARN AS YOU COMPARE

What’s inside this oil?

Constituents are the natural chemicals that give an oil its character. See the main ones, learn what they do, and explore differences between batches.

I’m interested in

Meet the main constituents, then select one to see what makes it interesting.

Finding the matching oil reports…

Report links found on the supplier source

Follow the original source to inspect the complete report. Link discovery alone does not validate the report or current stock.

Notes on the captured information

Details to keep in mind when using this listing.

  • Product name is a browsing group; botanical identity must be verified before chemical comparison.

AUTOMATIC OIL REVIEW

More evidence needed for this report

What the evidence tells you

4 reports connected; 4 directly linked by the supplier. Read the evidence before comparing chemistry.

Review these findings
Documented

4 source documents archived

The downloaded source document is preserved with its content fingerprint, so later changes do not overwrite the evidence. Archiving alone does not establish its report type or quantitative validity.

Documented

Report linked from the product page

The supplier connects this product to the report. Confirm the batch on the bottle before applying these figures to a purchase.

Evidence gap

Original analytical report status needs confirmation

These source documents are saved, but their status as original laboratory reports is unconfirmed or they are publisher summaries. They remain outside historical anomaly conclusions.

Evidence gap

Chemical extraction needs review

Automatically extracted figures are visible for inspection. They are excluded from historical anomaly conclusions until the extraction is reviewed.

Evidence gap

Comparison context is incomplete

Missing or unconfirmed: plant part, extraction method, origin, analysis method, batch, exact analysis date, percentage basis, botanical name. Unknown values are not assumed to match known values.

Evidence gap

Numerical comparison is not supported for this report

The source describes the analysis as qualitative. Its listed figures remain visible, but are excluded from numerical historical anomaly conclusions.

Evidence gap

Source extraction has review notes

The source describes a qualitative GC/MS analysis; these figures are not validated mass fractions. The source includes reproduction restrictions; the archived original remains private. A source date requires review against the original document. Additional source extraction notes require review against the original document.

Evidence gap

Numerical comparison is not supported for this report

The source extraction identifies mixed or multiple assays. A single comparable measurement series has not been established.

Investigate

Extracted percentages exceed 100%

The quantified total is 113.10%. Check for repeated peaks, mixed tables, or a transcription problem before using these values.

Evidence gap

Source extraction has review notes

Some source peak rows could not be fully verified or quantified. Multiple assay columns or mixed tables require separate review. The percentage measurement basis requires confirmation. Additional source extraction notes require review against the original document.

Evidence gap

Numerical comparison is not supported for this report

The source describes the analysis as qualitative. Its listed figures remain visible, but are excluded from numerical historical anomaly conclusions.

Evidence gap

Source extraction has review notes

The source describes a qualitative GC/MS analysis; these figures are not validated mass fractions. The source includes reproduction restrictions; the archived original remains private.

Evidence gap

Numerical comparison is not supported for this report

The source describes the analysis as qualitative. Its listed figures remain visible, but are excluded from numerical historical anomaly conclusions.

Evidence gap

Source extraction has review notes

The source describes a qualitative GC/MS analysis; these figures are not validated mass fractions. The source includes reproduction restrictions; the archived original remains private. A source date requires review against the original document. Additional source extraction notes require review against the original document.

Evidence gap

Not enough comparable history to assess differences

A range requires at least three earlier, reviewed original reports with the same botanical, chemotype, origin, plant part, extraction, analysis method, percentage basis and storage context. Missing and trace values are never replaced with zero.

Read the reported chemistry

Keep the original report, its identity, and the historical sample size in view.

Supplier / batch
Nature’s Gift
Batch not reported
Report botanical identity
Backhousia citriodora
Chemotype not reported
Origin / plant part
Origin not reported
Plant part not reported
Extraction / analysis
Extraction not reported
Method not reported · area percent
Source document archivedLinked from this productAnalysis: Date not reported
Read original source ↗
Chemical constituentThis reportMatched historical rangeWhat it means
Geranial48.37%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Neral37.98%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
(E)-Isocitral1.99%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
alpha-TerpineolCAS 98-55-51.75%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
beta-Caryophyllene1.55%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
GeraniolCAS 106-24-11.14%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
6-Methyl-5-hepten-2-one1.13%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
LinaloolCAS 78-70-60.80%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
(Z)-isocitral0.73%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
CitronellalCAS 106-23-00.59%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
alpha-CopaeneCAS 3856-25-50.56%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
BorneolCAS 507-70-00.24%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Terpinen-4-ol0.21%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Citronellol0.20%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Myrcene0.19%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
alpha-Humulene0.19%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
exo-Isocitral0.17%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
beta-ElemeneCAS 515-13-90.16%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
alpha-Terpinyl acetateCAS 80-26-20.14%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
NerolCAS 106-25-20.13%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Geranyl acetateCAS 105-87-30.12%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
(E)-beta-Farnesene0.12%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
BicyclogermacreneCAS 24703-35-30.12%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Caryophyllene oxideCAS 1139-30-60.10%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
beta-BisaboleneCAS 495-61-40.08%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Bornyl acetateCAS 76-49-30.07%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
delta-CadineneCAS 483-76-10.07%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
trans-Carveol0.06%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
delta-ElemeneCAS 20307-84-00.06%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
LimoneneCAS 138-86-30.04%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Methyl salicylate Phenolic0.04%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
AromadendreneCAS 489-39-40.04%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Viridiflorene0.04%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
neo-IsopulegolCAS 7786-67-60.03%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Neric acid Monoterpene Acid0.02%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
9-epi-(E)-Caryophyllene0.02%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
beta-SelineneCAS 17066-67-00.02%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
6-Methyl-5-hepten-2-ol0.01%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Pseudolimonene0.01%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
o-Cymene0.01%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
alpha-TerpineneCAS 99-86-50.01%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
para-Cymene0.01%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
(E)-beta-Ocimene0.01%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
gamma-TerpineneCAS 99-85-40.01%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Geranyl formateCAS 105-86-20.01%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
trans-alpha-BergamoteneCAS 13474-59-40.01%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
gamma-SelineneCAS 515-17-30.01%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Germacrene DCAS 23986-74-50.01%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
cis-alpha-Bisabolene0.01%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
(E,E)-alpha-Farnesene0.01%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
SpathulenolCAS 6750-60-30.01%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
51 measurements in this report · 51 shownObserved history is not a specification or a purity test.

Source changes

New listings, prices, and batch evidence.

  • Lemon Myrtle

    Analytical document archived; extraction awaits review.

    View source ↗
  • Lemon Myrtle

    Product first observed in the supplier catalog.

    View source ↗

Know what the evidence says

Three signals. No mystery scores.

Documented evidence

Source documents or comparable measurements support the specific finding shown.

Worth investigating

A chemistry difference or identity mismatch needs context. Open the report and matched history.

Evidence gap

A report, batch link, or key detail is missing. The oil's quality cannot be judged from missing information.