Evaluation of an Electronic Nose Coupled with In Vitro Fecal Fermentation as a Screening Tool for Fecal Odor in Cats.

Koramit Jenjirawatn, Attawit Kovitvadhi, Songyos Chotchutima, Pipatpong Chundang, Sathita Areerat, Kunaporn Homyog, Nattaphong Akrimajirachoote

Abstract read

PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher

In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Koramit JenjirawatnAnimal Health and Biomedical Science Program, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Kasetsart University, Bangkok 10900, Thailand.ORCID 0009-0000-6087-5392

Attawit KovitvadhiANLAR Service Co., Ltd., Pathum Thani 12130, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0002-0769-5234

Songyos ChotchutimaDepartment of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Kasetsart University, Bangkok 10900, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-4703-6396

Pipatpong ChundangDepartment of Physiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Kasetsart University, Bangkok 10900, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-0159-0869

Sathita AreeratDepartment of Physiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Kasetsart University, Bangkok 10900, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0002-3174-8471

Kunaporn HomyogCenter of Veterinary Diagnosis, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Mahidol University, Nakhon Pathom 73170, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0001-8282-5804

Nattaphong AkrimajirachooteDepartment of Physiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Kasetsart University, Bangkok 10900, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-4775-6537

Funding

Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Kasetsart university, Bangkok, Thailand.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In vitro fecal inoculation coupled with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) has been used for evaluating fecal deodorants. However, high cost and complex data interpretation limit its routine application. An electronic nose (eNose) offers a rapid, cost-effective alternative. This study aimed to evaluate the eNose as a screening tool for fecal odor compared with solid-phase microextraction gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (SPME GC-MS) and to examine the in vitro effects of fecal deodorant supplements on fecal odor profiles. Feces from ten healthy cats were serially diluted (1:1 to 1:8) and analyzed using both instruments. Four dietary supplements-

Indexed as

dietary fecal deodorantelectronic nosefecal inoculationfeline diet

Identifiers

PMID41829009

DOI10.3390/ani16050801

PMCPMC12984913

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.