Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33668511›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Application of a Low-Cost Electronic Nose for Differentiation between Pathogenic Oomycetes

Piotr Borowik, Leszek Adamowicz, Rafał Tarakowski, Przemysław Wacławik, Tomasz Oszako, Sławomir Ślusarski, Miłosz Tkaczyk

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Catching the ElusiveBiotech (Basel (Switzerland)) · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Electronic Nose Differentiation betweenMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Piotr BorowikFaculty of Physics, Warsaw University of Technology, ul. Koszykowa 75, 00-662 Warszawa, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-2906-246X
Leszek AdamowiczFaculty of Physics, Warsaw University of Technology, ul. Koszykowa 75, 00-662 Warszawa, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-2036-6571
Rafał TarakowskiFaculty of Physics, Warsaw University of Technology, ul. Koszykowa 75, 00-662 Warszawa, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-9666-8483
Przemysław WacławikFaculty of Physics, Warsaw University of Technology, ul. Koszykowa 75, 00-662 Warszawa, Poland.
Tomasz OszakoForest Protection Department, Forest Research Institute, ul. Braci Leśnej 3, 05-090 Sękocin Stary, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-4688-2582
Sławomir ŚlusarskiForest Protection Department, Forest Research Institute, ul. Braci Leśnej 3, 05-090 Sękocin Stary, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-9654-5854
Miłosz TkaczykForest Protection Department, Forest Research Institute, ul. Braci Leśnej 3, 05-090 Sękocin Stary, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-6031-996X
Warsaw University of Technology · PLInstytut Badawczy Leśnictwa · PL

Funding

National Centre for Research and Development BIOSTRATEG3/347105/9/NCBR/2017
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Compared with traditional gas chromatography-mass spectrometry techniques, electronic noses are non-invasive and can be a rapid, cost-effective option for several applications. This paper presents comparative studies of differentiation between odors emitted by two forest pathogens:

Indexed as

Electronic NosePhytophthoraPythiumGas Chromatography-Mass SpectrometryPlantsartificial olfactionbiosecurityelectronic aroma detectione-noseforest ecosystemsfungal and oomycetes volatilesodor classificationPhytophthoraPythiumvolatile organic compounds

Identifiers

PMID33668511
PMCPMC7918289
OpenAlexW3130083085

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.