Literature DB >> 11319776

Thresholds for sweet, salt, and sour taste stimuli in cockatiels (Nymphicus hollandicus).

Kevin D. Matson1, James R. Millam, Kirk C. Klasing.   

Abstract

Little is known about avian taste perception and how taste affects food choice. We designed a study to determine the concentrations of aqueous solutions of common chemical taste stimuli that result in altered consumption patterns. Using two-choice taste-preference tests, we studied the taste thresholds of caged cockatiels (Nymphicus hollandicus) for aqueous solutions of potassium chloride, a phosphate buffer (to test pH), fructose, and glucose. First, the preferred and nonpreferred bottle locations were determined for each bird. Then, depending on the compound, the test solutions were placed in bottles in either the preferred or the nonpreferred locations and water was placed in the opposite bottle. Four parameters were measured at the end of 3-day test periods (total consumption, consumption from water side, consumption from test solution side, and proportion of nonpreferred side consumption to total consumption). Experiments were repeated with increasing concentrations of test flavors until intake variables were significantly affected (P < 0.05). Cockatiels distinguished (P < 0.05) between purified water and 0.16 mol L(-1) potassium chloride, 0.40 mol L(-1) fructose, or 0.16 mol L(-1) glucose. The test birds did not distinguish between water and 0.05 mol L(-1) mono- and dibasic sodium phosphate buffer solution at any tested pH within the range of 4.9-7.7. When these findings are compared to previous experiments with the same birds, it becomes clear that the gustatory reactions of cockatiels for two different stimuli (e.g., NaCl and KCl) from the same general taste category (salt, sweet, sour) can vary widely. This variation in the responses to related stimuli could be the result of a number of factors including anion effects (for salts and acids) as well as nongustatory physiological processes (e.g., as renal control of blood osmolarity). Zoo Biol 20:1-13, 2001. Copyright 2001 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Year:  2001        PMID: 11319776     DOI: 10.1002/zoo.1001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Zoo Biol        ISSN: 0733-3188            Impact factor:   1.421


  6 in total

1.  Tasting the difference: do multiple defence chemicals interact in Müllerian mimicry?

Authors:  John Skelhorn; Candy Rowe
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2005-02-07       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 2.  Genetics of taste receptors.

Authors:  Alexander A Bachmanov; Natalia P Bosak; Cailu Lin; Ichiro Matsumoto; Makoto Ohmoto; Danielle R Reed; Theodore M Nelson
Journal:  Curr Pharm Des       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 3.116

3.  Genetics of sweet taste preferences.

Authors:  Alexander A Bachmanov; Natalia P Bosak; Wely B Floriano; Masashi Inoue; Xia Li; Cailu Lin; Vladimir O Murovets; Danielle R Reed; Vasily A Zolotarev; Gary K Beauchamp
Journal:  Flavour Fragr J       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 2.576

4.  Salt intake and regulation in two passerine nectar drinkers: white-bellied sunbirds and New Holland honeyeaters.

Authors:  Cromwell Purchase; Susan W Nicolson; Patricia A Fleming
Journal:  J Comp Physiol B       Date:  2012-12-12       Impact factor: 2.200

5.  Whitebellied sunbirds (Nectarinia talatala, Nectariniidae) do not prefer artificial nectar containing amino acids.

Authors:  C D C Leseigneur; L Verburgt; S W Nicolson
Journal:  J Comp Physiol B       Date:  2007-05-31       Impact factor: 2.230

6.  Darwin's small and medium ground finches might have taste preferences, but not for human foods.

Authors:  D Lever; L V Rush; R Thorogood; K M Gotanda
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2022-01-26       Impact factor: 2.963

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.