ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2025
Comparison of component and quality changes between soft rice and common rice during aging.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evolution of Rice Storage Quality and Underlying Microstructural Mechanisms Under Varying Nitrogen Fertilization Application Levels.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Compared to common rice, soft rice is characterized by low amylose content, soft and elastic texture, and low retrogradation of cold rice. However, the differences of quality deteriorate during aging between soft rice and common rice are still unclear. Methods: In this study, representative soft rice varieties (NJ9108 and NJ46) were chosen as research subjects, and YJ7081 and HD5 were chosen as control. The changes of their components and quality during aging were comprehensively investigated. Results: During aging, the total starch, fat, and protein content of soft rice decrease, while the amylose content increases. The short-range ordered structure of soft rice starch and the secondary structure of proteins gradually degrade with the extension of aging time. In addition, the relative crystallinity of soft rice starch gradually decreases during the aging process. After aging for 24 M, the average taste value of soft rice decreased by 14.86, and the average 2-AP content decreased by 167.82 ng/g. The average taste value of common rice decreased by 12.52, and the average 2-AP content decreased by 140.42 ng/g. Conclusion: Compared to common rice, the component contents and the starch short-range ordered structure characteristics of soft rice exhibited more pronounced changes, leading to increased deterioration of cooking, eating, and aroma qualities during aging.
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.