Literature DB >> 10944507

Quantification of odor quality.

P M Wise1, M J Olsson, W S Cain.   

Abstract

The relationship between odor quality and molecular properties is arguably the most important issue in olfaction. Despite sophistication in the chemical characterization of molecules, accompanying perceptual characterization has had little quantitative usefulness, relying mostly on enumerative description. As a result of weak interest in the topic outside industry and little agreement regarding how to measure quality, the field of olfactory psychophysics has failed to develop a substantial database for odor quality and has offered little help to other researchers, e.g. neurobiologists, in choice of stimuli, interpretation of outcome or testable hypotheses. This review scrutinizes how psychophysicists and others have measured quality and offers criteria for useful techniques. Most measures have had a subjective component that makes them anachronistic with modern methodology in experimental behavioral science, indeterminate regarding the extent of individual differences, unusable with infrahumans and of unproved ability to discern small differences. Techniques based upon performance, rather than on the more common reporting of mental content, offer firmer possibilities for growth. These techniques inevitably tap the discriminative basis of perception. The nonsubjective techniques have high sensitivity, can have counterparts in infrahuman research, are suitable to examine individual differences and yield non-negotiable answers with potential archival value. Discriminative techniques have their limitations, too-principally excess sensitivity that abridges their use to comparisons between similar-smelling stimuli. Research has begun to extend that range and may overcome the limitation. Application of discriminative methods may have the side-effect of shifting focus in structure-activity research from searches for molecular least common denominators that underlie often vague similarity to the search for molecular properties of importance in discrimination of small differences.

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10944507     DOI: 10.1093/chemse/25.4.429

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


  34 in total

1.  Variation in complex olfactory stimuli and its influence on odour recognition.

Authors:  Geraldine A Wrigh; Brian H Smith
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2004-01-22       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Time and intensity factors in identification of components of odor mixtures.

Authors:  Marion E Frank; Holly F Goyert; Thomas P Hettinger
Journal:  Chem Senses       Date:  2010-08-18       Impact factor: 3.160

3.  Odor frequency and odor annoyance. Part I: assessment of frequency, intensity and hedonic tone of environmental odors in the field.

Authors:  Kirsten Sucker; Ralf Both; Michael Bischoff; Rainer Guski; Gerhard Winneke
Journal:  Int Arch Occup Environ Health       Date:  2007-10-12       Impact factor: 3.015

4.  Relationships among taste qualities assessed with response-context effects.

Authors:  Paul M Wise; Paul A S Breslin
Journal:  Chem Senses       Date:  2011-03-25       Impact factor: 3.160

5.  Olfactory working memory: effects of verbalization on the 2-back task.

Authors:  Fredrik U Jönsson; Per Møller; Mats J Olsson
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2011-08

6.  Influence of odorant receptor repertoire on odor perception in humans and fruit flies.

Authors:  Andreas Keller; Leslie B Vosshall
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2007-03-19       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Individual olfactory perception reveals meaningful nonolfactory genetic information.

Authors:  Lavi Secundo; Kobi Snitz; Kineret Weissler; Liron Pinchover; Yehuda Shoenfeld; Ron Loewenthal; Nancy Agmon-Levin; Idan Frumin; Dana Bar-Zvi; Sagit Shushan; Noam Sobel
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-06-22       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Odour concentration affects odour identity in honeybees.

Authors:  Geraldine A Wright; Mitchell G A Thomson; Brian H Smith
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2005-11-22       Impact factor: 5.349

9.  Biomimetic chemical sensors using nanoelectronic readout of olfactory receptor proteins.

Authors:  Brett R Goldsmith; Joseph J Mitala; Jesusa Josue; Ana Castro; Mitchell B Lerner; Timothy H Bayburt; Samuel M Khamis; Ryan A Jones; Joseph G Brand; Stephen G Sligar; Charles W Luetje; Alan Gelperin; Paul A Rhodes; Bohdana M Discher; A T Charlie Johnson
Journal:  ACS Nano       Date:  2011-07-06       Impact factor: 15.881

10.  Limitations in odour simulation may originate from differential sensory embodiment.

Authors:  Artin Arshamian; Patricia Manko; Asifa Majid
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2020-04-20       Impact factor: 6.237

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.