ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2026
Odor Sampling Bags Enable Reliable Delivery of Controlled Odor Concentrations.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Precise control of odorant concentration is essential for reliable olfactory research, yet existing odorant delivery methods often suffer from solvent interactions and dilution from ambient air, limiting stimulus consistency in olfactory research. We developed an odor sampling bag system using Nalophan plastic to create a closed headspace with air as the carrier medium, eliminating solvent-related variability and ambient air dilution. In two independent experiments, 15 trained panelists each rated the perceived intensity of seven concentrations of benzaldehyde and 2-heptanone using both gas-sampling bags and glass jars. Bags produced higher maximum perceptual intensities (p < 0.001) and greater test-retest reliability than jars (Experiment 1: r = 0.89 vs. 0.81, p < 0.001; Experiment 2: r = 0.86 vs. 0.72, p < 0.001). Notably, the two tested odorants showed different maximum intensities in bags (p < 0.001) but not jars (p = 0.85), suggesting bags better preserve odorant-specific concentration differences. Photoionization detector measurements confirmed stable headspace concentrations over time, comparable to industry-standard Tedlar bags. This cost-effective approach offers improved stimulus control for olfactory psychophysics research.
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.