Can humans smell tastants?

IF 2.8 4区 心理学 Q1 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES Chemical Senses Pub Date : 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1093/chemse/bjad054
Shuo Mu, Markus Stieger, Sanne Boesveldt
{"title":"Can humans smell tastants?","authors":"Shuo Mu, Markus Stieger, Sanne Boesveldt","doi":"10.1093/chemse/bjad054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although studies have shown that olfaction may contribute to the perception of tastant, literature is scarce or circumstantial, especially in humans. This study aims to (i) explore whether humans can perceive solutions of basic prototypical tastants through orthonasal and retronasal olfaction and (ii) to examine what volatile odor compounds (VOCs) underlie this ability. Solutions of 5 basic tastants (sucrose, sodium chloride, citric acid, monosodium glutamate [MSG], quinine) dissolved in water, and 2 fatty acids (oleic and linoleic acid) dissolved in mineral oil were prepared. Triangle discrimination tests were performed (n = 41 in duplicate) to assess whether the tastant solutions can be distinguished from blanks (solvents) through ortho- and retronasal olfaction. Participants were able to distinguish all tastant solutions from blank through orthonasal olfaction. Only sucrose, sodium chloride, oleic acid, and linoleic acid were distinguished from blank by retronasal olfaction. Ethyl dichloroacetate, methylene chloride, and/or acetone were identified in the headspace of sucrose, MSG, and quinine solutions but not in the headspace of water, sodium chloride, and citric acid solutions. Fat oxidation compounds such as alcohols and aldehydes were detected in the headspace of the oleic and linoleic acid solutions but not the mineral oil. We conclude that prototypical tastant solutions can be discriminated from water and fatty acid solutions from mineral oil through orthonasal olfaction. Differences in the volatile headspace composition between blanks and tastant solutions may have facilitated the olfactory discrimination. These findings can have methodological implications for future studies assessing gustatory perception using these prototypical taste compounds.</p>","PeriodicalId":9771,"journal":{"name":"Chemical Senses","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10807988/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chemical Senses","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/chemse/bjad054","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although studies have shown that olfaction may contribute to the perception of tastant, literature is scarce or circumstantial, especially in humans. This study aims to (i) explore whether humans can perceive solutions of basic prototypical tastants through orthonasal and retronasal olfaction and (ii) to examine what volatile odor compounds (VOCs) underlie this ability. Solutions of 5 basic tastants (sucrose, sodium chloride, citric acid, monosodium glutamate [MSG], quinine) dissolved in water, and 2 fatty acids (oleic and linoleic acid) dissolved in mineral oil were prepared. Triangle discrimination tests were performed (n = 41 in duplicate) to assess whether the tastant solutions can be distinguished from blanks (solvents) through ortho- and retronasal olfaction. Participants were able to distinguish all tastant solutions from blank through orthonasal olfaction. Only sucrose, sodium chloride, oleic acid, and linoleic acid were distinguished from blank by retronasal olfaction. Ethyl dichloroacetate, methylene chloride, and/or acetone were identified in the headspace of sucrose, MSG, and quinine solutions but not in the headspace of water, sodium chloride, and citric acid solutions. Fat oxidation compounds such as alcohols and aldehydes were detected in the headspace of the oleic and linoleic acid solutions but not the mineral oil. We conclude that prototypical tastant solutions can be discriminated from water and fatty acid solutions from mineral oil through orthonasal olfaction. Differences in the volatile headspace composition between blanks and tastant solutions may have facilitated the olfactory discrimination. These findings can have methodological implications for future studies assessing gustatory perception using these prototypical taste compounds.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
人类能闻到味道吗?
尽管有研究表明嗅觉可能有助于味觉感知,但相关文献很少或只是间接的,尤其是在人类身上。本研究旨在(a)探讨人类是否能通过正鼻腔和反鼻腔嗅觉感知基本原型味素的溶液,(b)并研究哪些挥发性气味化合物(VOC)是这种能力的基础。我们制备了五种基本味觉刺激物(溶于水的蔗糖、氯化钠、柠檬酸、谷氨酸钠(味精)、奎宁)和两种脂肪酸(溶于矿物油的油酸和亚油酸)的溶液。进行三角辨别测试(41 人,一式两份),以评估能否通过正鼻和反鼻嗅觉将味觉溶液与空白溶液(溶剂)区分开来。参与者能够通过正鼻嗅觉将所有味觉溶液与空白区分开来。只有蔗糖、氯化钠、油酸和亚油酸能通过反鼻嗅觉从空白溶液中区分出来。在蔗糖、味精和奎宁溶液的顶空气体中发现了二氯乙酸乙酯、二氯甲烷和/或丙酮,而在水、氯化钠和柠檬酸溶液的顶空气体中则没有发现。在油酸和亚油酸溶液的顶空气体中检测到了脂肪氧化化合物(如醇和醛),但在矿物油中没有检测到。我们的结论是,通过正鼻腔嗅觉可以从水和矿物油中分辨出原型味道溶液和脂肪酸溶液。空白和品尝剂溶液之间顶空挥发性成分的差异可能有助于嗅觉分辨。这些发现对今后使用这些原型味觉化合物评估味觉感知的研究具有方法学意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Chemical Senses
Chemical Senses 医学-行为科学
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
2.90%
发文量
25
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Chemical Senses publishes original research and review papers on all aspects of chemoreception in both humans and animals. An important part of the journal''s coverage is devoted to techniques and the development and application of new methods for investigating chemoreception and chemosensory structures.
期刊最新文献
A receptor-based assay to study the sweet and bitter tastes of sweeteners and binary sweet blends: The SWEET Project. Late olfactory bulb involvement in COVID19. Monorhinal and Birhinal Odor Processing in Humans: an fMRI investigation. Taste And Odor Interactions After Metabolic Surgery Novel Gurmarin-like Peptides from Gymnema sylvestre and their Interactions with the Sweet Taste Receptor T1R2/T1R3
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1