The essential oils yield of , and was different. gave a relatively higher yield (2.1 ± 0.1%), while that of was low (1.0 ± 0.1%) and that of was lower (0.75 ± 0.1% of dry matter). The active ingredients of the essential oils and some of their biological effects were also determined. The characterization of their chemical compositions showed that the three essences have different chemical profiles: was richer in sesquiterpenes (β-Himachalene (54.21%) and γ -Himachalene (15.54%)), was very rich in monoterpene peroxides and monoterpenes (α-Terpinene (53.4%), ascaridole (17.7%) and ρ-Cymene (12.1%)) and was very rich in monoterpene compounds and monoterpenols (p-cymene (35.11%), γ-Eudesmol (11.9%), L-linalool (11.51%) and piperitone (10.28%)). The in vitro measurement of antioxidant activity by the 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl radical (DPPH) reduction assay showed a significant performance of the eucalyptus oil and average performance of the other two ( and . The in vitro bio-test for their antimicrobial effects showed that the antibacterial activity differed depending on the essential oil and the concentration used, and that their bactericidal efficacy was similar or superior to that of synthetic antibiotics. The toxicity test on rats revealed that the LD of the three essential oils was 500 mg/kg body weight, which classifies them as category four cytotoxic natural products at high doses.