ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Effectiveness of Differentiating Mold Levels in Soybeans with Electronic Nose Detection Technology.
Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Meat flavor ofFood chemistry: X · 2026Article
- Nisin improves the storage quality of refrigerated pre-packaged fermented soybean whey-tofu-food safety, texture, and flavor.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study employed electronic nose technology to assess the mold levels in soybeans, conducting analyses on artificially inoculated soybeans with five strains of fungi and distinguishing them from naturally moldy soybeans. Principal component analysis (PCA) and linear discriminant analysis (LDA) were used to evaluate inoculated and naturally moldy samples. The results revealed that the most influential sensor was W2W, which is sensitive to organic sulfur compounds, followed by W1W (primarily responsive to inorganic sulfur compounds), W5S (sensitive to small molecular nitrogen oxides), W1S (responsive to short-chain alkanes such as methane), and W2S (sensitive to alcohols, ethers, aldehydes, and ketones). These findings highlight that variations in volatile substances among the moldy soybean samples were predominantly attributed to organic sulfur compounds, with significant distinctions noted in inorganic sulfur, nitrogen compounds, short-chain alkanes, and alcohols/ethers/aldehydes/ketones. The results of the PCA and LDA analyses indicated that while both methods demonstrated moderate effectiveness in distinguishing between different dominant fungal inoculations and naturally moldy soybeans, they were more successful in differentiating various levels of moldiness, achieving a discriminative accuracy rate of 82.72% in LDA. Overall, the findings suggest that electronic nose detection technology can effectively identify mold levels in soybeans.
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.