ReviewFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Ancient Wheats-A Nutritional and Sensory Analysis Review.
Review in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genomic insights into end-use grain quality and nutritional traits of an ancient Indian dwarf wheat ( Triticum sphaerococcum Percival) population using a multi-locus genome-wide association study.Journal of the science of food and agriculture · 2026Article
- Protein Quality and IgE-Binding in Ancient and Modern Wheat: An Analytical Study.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Digital PCR for the Authentication of KAMUTFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Processability of Ancient Wheats for Novel Value Chains and Agro-Food Biodiversity.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Are Alternative Crops Needed for Future Sustainable Food Production?Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Grains, Cereals, and Legumes: Implications in Glycemic Index and Perspectives.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Ancient Grains as Functional Foods: Integrating Traditional Knowledge with Contemporary Nutritional Science.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Comparison of metabolite profiles and policosanol contents in the sprout of Oriental wheat cultivars (Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Comparative Evaluation of the Sensory Qualities of Refined and Wholegrain Rice as Ingredients within Mixed Dishes.Nutrients · 2024Article
- Characterization ofFrontiers in plant science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this review is to provide a critical evaluation of the nutritional and sensory properties of ancient wheats (spelt, emmer, einkorn, and kamut) and the methods used to analyze them. This paper provides a comprehensive overview of the main analytical methods applied to study the nutritional properties of ancient wheats. According to our findings, protein content was the most commonly studied macronutrient across all types of ancient wheat species. The article notes that einkorn bran showed the highest protein and ash content, which reveals the potential of ancient wheats to be more widely used in food products. Regarding the majority of amino acids in spelt wheat cultivars, the general trend in the data was rather consistent. This review also compares sensory evaluation methods for different wheat products made from ancient wheats, such as bread, pasta, cooked grains, porridge, snacks, and muffins. The various reported methods and panel sizes used prove that ancient wheat products have many potential sensory advantages. Overall, using ancient wheats in wheat products can enhance the nutritional benefits, increase diversity in the food systems, and may be more appealing to consumers looking for something different, thereby contributing to the development of more sustainable and locally based food systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.