New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Judging a Book by Its Odor

A study in the journal Analytical Chemistry identifies various organic compounds that old books give off and that can be analyzed noninvasively, offering important clues to an historic work's condition and prognosis. Steve Mirsky reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

“This book stinks!” is really a bad review. But even a classic work can start to smell when it gets old enough. Now chemists have developed a technique that identifies what kind of degradation process an old book or historical document is going through, based on the odors it gives off. The report appears in the American Chemical Society journal Analytical Chemistry.

An old book’s familiar musty smell is due to hundreds of different volatile organic compounds gassing out from the paper and other materials, such as the binding. The particular blend of compounds results from specific degradation pathways. Conventional analysis techniques require small samples of the work for testing, further damaging the book. But analyzing the gases coming off of the old books is noninvasive.

The researchers identified 15 organic compounds that made good markers to track the condition of books. They note that their system could be used to evaluate the type of document, its present condition and its likely future, thus helping preservationists map a strategy to save historical works.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


—Steve Mirsky

[The above text is an exact transcript of the audio in the podcast.]

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe