Literature DB >> 1529017

Facial expressions and genetic sensitivity to 6-n-propylthiouracil predict hedonic response to sweet.

H Looy1, H P Weingarten.   

Abstract

Individuals differ in their hedonic response to sweet: sweet likers show increasing liking with increasing sucrose concentration, while sweet dislikers show increasing dislike with increasing concentration. Our results indicated that naive raters can correctly classify sweet likers and dislikers by observing subjects' facial responses to the taste of sucrose. Also, for both adults and children, the sweet liker/disliker distinction correlated strongly with the genetically determined ability to taste 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP): PROP nontasters were almost always sweet likers, whereas sweet dislikers were almost always PROP tasters. Sweet dislikers also reported a purer sweet sensation than likers, who perceived nonsweet components in pure sucrose solutions. These results suggest that the sweet liker/disliker distinction is robust and valid, and that sensitivity to PROP may influence preference for sweet by altering the quality of sweet.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1529017     DOI: 10.1016/0031-9384(92)90435-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Physiol Behav        ISSN: 0031-9384


  23 in total

Review 1.  Psychophysics of sweet and fat perception in obesity: problems, solutions and new perspectives.

Authors:  Linda M Bartoshuk; Valerie B Duffy; John E Hayes; Howard R Moskowitz; Derek J Snyder
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2006-07-29       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 2.  6-n-Propylthiouracil: a genetic marker for taste, with implications for food preference and dietary habits.

Authors:  B J Tepper
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 11.025

Review 3.  Heritable variation in food preferences and their contribution to obesity.

Authors:  D R Reed; A A Bachmanov; G K Beauchamp; M G Tordoff; R A Price
Journal:  Behav Genet       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 2.805

4.  Bitter taste phenotype and body weight predict children's selection of sweet and savory foods at a palatable test-meal.

Authors:  Kathleen L Keller; Annemarie Olsen; Terri L Cravener; Rachel Bloom; Wendy K Chung; Liyong Deng; Patricia Lanzano; Karol Meyermann
Journal:  Appetite       Date:  2014-03-06       Impact factor: 3.868

5.  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

6.  Sweet taste perception is greater in non-Hispanic black than in non-Hispanic white adults.

Authors:  Suzanne Bowser; Nicole Farnsworth; Kate Russell; Haley Schlechter; Shanna Bernstein; Amber B Courville; Kirsten Zambell; Monica Skarulis; Ranganath Muniyappa
Journal:  Nutrition       Date:  2018-08-23       Impact factor: 4.008

7.  Measures of individual differences in taste and creaminess perception.

Authors:  Juyun Lim; Lenka Urban; Barry G Green
Journal:  Chem Senses       Date:  2008-05-03       Impact factor: 3.160

8.  Intravenous morphine self-administration by rats with low versus high saccharin preferences.

Authors:  B A Gosnell; K E Lane; S M Bell; D D Krahn
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 4.530

Review 9.  Nonnutritive sweetener consumption in humans: effects on appetite and food intake and their putative mechanisms.

Authors:  Richard D Mattes; Barry M Popkin
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  2008-12-03       Impact factor: 7.045

10.  Oral sensory phenotype identifies level of sugar and fat required for maximal liking.

Authors:  John E Hayes; Valerie B Duffy
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2008-05-02
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.