No access / Whiskey Literature Notes Database (USWA)
All twelve main-article pages reviewed, including Tables 1–3, Figures 1–2, disclosures and references. Supplementary Table S1 is still inaccessible. No sensory-terroir or blending-performance Claim promoted.
Source argument
Source: No access.
Elemental profiling can distinguish the sampled whisk(e)y types and Scotch regions. The authors propose production equipment and dilution water as important sources of differentiating elements and suggest further sampling during production.
Evidence map
Elemental profiles — sample composition constrains generalization — Samples and Reagents; Table 1.
Elemental profiles — group differences and elemental-count discrepancy — Results 3.1; Tables 2–3.
Elemental profiles — equipment and dilution water are proposed mechanisms — Results 3.1–3.2; Conclusions.
Citation: Hopfer et al. — Elemental Profiles, methods and results.
Researcher synthesis
Retain this as primary evidence about chemical characterization and authentication. Do not convert elemental differentiation into a demonstrated flavor-terroir effect, brand identification, consumer preference, or a method for successful home blending. Its greatest cross-source value is clarifying which measurements can and cannot answer sensory questions.
Assessment
The complete twelve-page PDF and main publisher text were reviewed, including Tables 1–3 and Figures 1–2. The 68-product design has unequal type samples, only two Tennessee products, and repeated distillery identifiers. CVA group separation is in-sample evidence, not a reported externally validated accuracy. Figure 1's two displayed axes explain about 74% of canonical variation, not 74% classification accuracy. Some groups overlap in the two-dimensional display; any claimed third-axis separation is not shown there. Figure 2 shows distributions and significance groupings, not universal regional fingerprints. Supplementary Table S1 remains unread. The 53/58-element inconsistency persists in the PDF.
Open questions: Does supplementary Table S1 clarify the instrumental element count? Would a larger, independently tested sample retain the discrimination? The main PDF is matched and preserved in Notion; a separate backup and unprovided raw data have not been obtained.