ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Volatile Chemistry and Aroma Differences in Commercial Soy Sauces: Sensory Links and Odorant-Receptor Interactions.
Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 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
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
Volatile and sensory differences among 28 commercial soy sauces were investigated using HS-GC-IMS, check-all-that-apply (CATA) evaluation, aroma addition experiments, and molecular docking. Ninety-nine volatile compounds from 14 chemical classes were detected. Total semiquantitative volatile concentrations ranged from 2024.56 to 6279.59 μg/mL, with esters, alcohols, and aldehydes accounting for 70.68% of the total. Of the 24 CATA descriptors, 13 were retained for product-level correlation analysis. Exploratory Pearson analysis indicated that alcoholic, savory, and malty attributes were associated with a group dominated by fatty acids, branched-chain alcohols, and esters, whereas woody and chocolate-like attributes showed an opposing pattern involving several aldehydes, ketones, and alkylpyrazines. Fifteen candidate compounds were evaluated by single-compound addition. Benzaldehyde and ethyl propanoate enhanced savory perception; 2-ethyl-3,5-dimethylpyrazine enhanced the alcoholic attribute; methyl 2-methylbutyrate enhanced smoky, meaty, and alcoholic attributes; and ethyl acetate enhanced malty, meaty, and alcoholic attributes. Several other additions produced opposing or nonsignificant effects, indicating matrix- and concentration-dependent responses. Among the binary docking models, guaiacol-2-ethyl-3,5-dimethylpyrazine and homofuraneol-benzaldehyde produced the lowest scores with OR10G4 (-10.10 kcal/mol) and OR5M3 (-13.32 kcal/mol), respectively. In combination, these results show that product-level correlations can guide candidate selection but require matrix-based sensory verification, while docking provides structural hypotheses for odorant co-binding.
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.