Literature DB >> 10321817

Olfactory discrimination ability of human subjects for ten pairs of enantiomers.

M Laska1, P Teubner.   

Abstract

We tested the ability of human subjects to distinguish between enantiomers, i.e. odorants which are identical except for chirality. In a forced-choice triangular test procedure 20 subjects were repeatedly presented with 10 enantiomeric odor pairs and asked to identify the bottle containing the odd stimulus. We found (i) that as a group, the subjects were only able to significantly discriminate the optical isomers of alpha-pinene, carvone and limonene, whereas they failed to distinguish between the (+)- and (-)-forms of menthol, fenchone, rose oxide, camphor, alpha-terpineol, beta-citronellol and 2-butanol; (ii) marked individual differences in discrimination performance, ranging from subjects who were able to significantly discriminate between 6 of the 10 odor pairs to subjects who failed to do so with 9 of the 10 tasks; (iii) that with none of the 10 odor pairs were the antipodes reported to differ significantly in subjective intensity when presented at equal concentrations; and (iv) that error rates were quite stable and did not differ significantly between sessions, and thus, we observed a lack of learning or training effects. Additional tests of the degree of trigeminality and threshold measurements of the optical isomers of alpha-pinene, carvone and limonene suggest that the discriminability of these three enantiomeric odor pairs is indeed due to differences in odor quality. These findings support the assumption that enantioselective molecular odor receptors may only exist for some but not all volatile enantiomers and thus that chiral recognition of odorants may not be a general phenomenon but is restricted to some substances.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10321817     DOI: 10.1093/chemse/24.2.161

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Chem Senses        ISSN: 0379-864X            Impact factor:   3.160


  25 in total

1.  Chemical determinants of the rat electro-olfactogram.

Authors:  J W Scott; T Brierley; F H Schmidt
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2000-06-15       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Perceptual correlates of neural representations evoked by odorant enantiomers.

Authors:  C Linster; B A Johnson; E Yue; A Morse; Z Xu; E E Hingco; Y Choi; M Choi; A Messiha; M Leon
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2001-12-15       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 3.  Enantiomeric natural products: occurrence and biogenesis.

Authors:  Jennifer M Finefield; David H Sherman; Martin Kreitman; Robert M Williams
Journal:  Angew Chem Int Ed Engl       Date:  2012-05-03       Impact factor: 15.336

4.  Aversive learning enhances perceptual and cortical discrimination of indiscriminable odor cues.

Authors:  Wen Li; James D Howard; Todd B Parrish; Jay A Gottfried
Journal:  Science       Date:  2008-03-28       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 5.  Function follows form: ecological constraints on odor codes and olfactory percepts.

Authors:  Jay A Gottfried
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurobiol       Date:  2009-08-09       Impact factor: 6.627

Review 6.  Molecular gastronomy: a new emerging scientific discipline.

Authors:  Peter Barham; Leif H Skibsted; Wender L P Bredie; Michael Bom Frøst; Per Møller; Jens Risbo; Pia Snitkjaer; Louise Mørch Mortensen
Journal:  Chem Rev       Date:  2010-04-14       Impact factor: 60.622

7.  Olfactory discrimination ability of CD-1 mice for a large array of enantiomers.

Authors:  M Laska; G M Shepherd
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  2006-10-11       Impact factor: 3.590

8.  Olfactory discrimination ability of South African fur seals (Arctocephalus pusillus) for enantiomers.

Authors:  Sunghee Kim; Mats Amundin; Matthias Laska
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2012-09-26       Impact factor: 1.836

9.  Characteristic component odors emerge from mixtures after selective adaptation.

Authors:  Holly F Goyert; Marion E Frank; Janneane F Gent; Thomas P Hettinger
Journal:  Brain Res Bull       Date:  2007-01-16       Impact factor: 4.077

10.  Spontaneous versus reinforced olfactory discriminations.

Authors:  Christiane Linster; Brett A Johnson; Alix Morse; Esther Yue; Michael Leon
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2002-08-15       Impact factor: 6.167

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.