Jump to content

Talk:Citral

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Citral is found in LemonGrass as well as Lemon-Verbena (known as luisa in Spanish). Research show it has abilities to kill cancer cells while living healthy cells in tact (so far this was only done in a lab)

Consistency with wiki article on Orange (fruit)

[edit]

The wiki article on Orange (fruit) states that "Orange peel contains citral, an aldehyde that antagonises the action of vitamin A. Therefore anyone eating citrus peels should make certain that their dietary intake of vitamin A is sufficient." This information does not appear in the article on citral. Sah64 (talk) 22:46, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Small very wonkish, technical, and nitpicky note on sidebar

[edit]

Perhaps it is just my take, but I don't think the side bar conveys the relationship of citral, geranial, and neral correctly. They aren't exactly equivalent as citral is the mixture of the two. But the sidebar suggests that both neral and geranial are synonyms for citral. This isn't true. It is very difficult to get neral and geranial pure as they love to equilibrate into each other with little provocation, forming the at or near equilibrium mixture that is citral, but these three things are not synonyms. Indeed one can obtain geranial or neral pure, for instance by taking the corresponding alcohol (geraniol or nerol) doing a Swern oxidation, forgoing any aqueous or ionic work up as well as chromatography, and instead kugelror distill at reduced pressure directly from the semicrude mixture following a series of filtrations and extremely mild solid phase purification steps. The resulting pure geranial or neral has slightly (but sometimes importantly) different properties then their at-or-near-equilibrium mixture citral. Such differences include data in the side bar such as boiling point, melting point, density, or as the article itself notes, differences in their aromatic notes. Thus these are not really synonyms as the sidebar implies, just highly related or component compounds.

For the sidebar I would thus recommend:

1) Structures: instead of showing geranial and neral in two seperate pictures next to each other, show them in one with a little "+" in between the two component structures of the mixture

2) "Other Names" should be "citral, geranial + neral, geranialdehyde + neraldehyde" combining the two components of the mixture when specified on the same line to indicate the mixture and not imply that it is synonymous to one of the component compounds.

Just a suggestion, though perhaps this may be needlessly over-technical and over-precise relative to what the various maintainers of this page wish to do. I still think it is worth it as it is a very minor touch up that may help eliminate any misconceptions of those who go to learn about citral mostly by using just the sidebar of this page.149.155.222.31 (talk) 10:59, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think that we should make this article about the E-isomer, since it is the more stable isomer, and because we usually have chemboxes on pure, and if applicable, racemic, compounds. Accordingly, E/Z-isomers can be considered as distinct compounds. The mixture and the Z-isomer can still be discussed with in the article, as compared with the E-isomer, but the chembox should be exclusively about the E-isomer. Plasmic Physics (talk) 13:51, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I actually disagree with making the article just about the E isomer (a.k.a. geranial). Citral is a common and important mixture. While geranial maybe more stable, either the E or Z isomer are VERY hard to obtain pure from the other to the point where even most chemical and biochemical researchers, even those that work at a very high level, just work with the mixture that is citral even when they would prefer to do work with only one of the two constituent isomerically pure components. As such Citral is far too important and significant not to have an article devoted to it while pure neral or geranial (the Z and E isomers respectively) are sufficiently rare and esoteric by comparison that I am not sure they satisfy Wikipeida's importance guidelines to warrant their own pages and thus they are best incorporated under the Citral article with notes about their specific differences and unique properties, as to a certain extent they already are.
You are right about the side bar, in some respects aspects of the side bar may only make sense for pure compounds, but as citral is an important commercially available chemical mixture with many measurable physical properties (where as neither pure isomer is commercially available and fewer properties are known about them) the sidebar still seems reasonable and even important to me. I would agree that it is worth discussing which items on the sidebar do and don't make sense for the mixture, and thus which should be kept for citral and which should be removed. For instance citral has a meaningful and measurable boiling range, melting range, density, ect... which is all very important sidebar data for this commercially available and both scientifically and industrially important chemical mixture. Meanwhile things like the SMILES code arguably might make a little less sense as it is really two SMILES codes without telling users which one is which (I can tell them appart but not everyone checking the page will). I personally am not opposed to the SMILES but I could see arguing against them for the sidebar for citral as it is slightly nonsensical being a mixture and all.
As neither geranial nor neral are really significant enough to warrant their own pages (or to usurp citral as the lead of this one) would it perhaps be reasonable to add three sidebars to this page, one for the mixture, and two for the two individual pure components? I don't know if that would just be too messy or weird or whatnot but I find that more appealing then getting rid of the critical data for a fairly important and common chemical mixture and replacing with fairly esoteric and arguably far less practical data for hard to obtain individual components that very few people have or do ever actually do any work with. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.155.222.31 (talk) 10:17, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think that you would get a better opinion from the Chemicals WikiProject. They are a group of editors that want to work together as a team to improve chemical related content on Wikipedia, of which I am a member. The Chemicals WikiProject is also a daughter WikiProject of the Chemistry WikiProject. As point of reference have a look at hydrochloric acid v.s. hydrogen chloride. Plasmic Physics (talk) 10:56, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we could retain the focus of the article upon the citral mixture, but at the cost the chembox. The chemboxes are not designed to handle mixtures, and it would not be ureasonable to suggest moving the data which you noted to the main article space. Three chemboxes are absolutely out of the question, that would go against infobox guilines/policy. (I can't remember which). Plasmic Physics (talk) 11:15, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Citral. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:24, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Source was not useful. --Zefr (talk) 16:16, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Citral. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:09, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Citral&oldid=1194741720"