Literature DB >> 18773913

Thermal taste, PROP responsiveness, and perception of oral sensations.

Martha R Bajec1, Gary J Pickering.   

Abstract

Differences between 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP) taster groups have long been the focus of studies on individual variation in perception of oral sensation. Recently, "thermal taste" was described, the phenomenon whereby some individuals perceive "phantom" taste sensations after thermal stimulation of small areas of the tongue. As with PROP taster status (PTS), thermal taster status (TTS) has been proposed as a proxy for general responsiveness to oral stimuli. Here we examined the influence of PTS and TTS, independently, on the perceived intensity of sweet, sour, salty, bitter, astringent, and metallic stimuli, and temperature on heating or cooling the tongue. Interactions between PTS and TTS were also examined, and fungiform papillae (FP) density and salivary flow rate (SFR) were determined. Both PTS and TTS were associated with perceived stimulus intensities. PROP super-tasters (pSTs) rated all oral stimuli as more intense than PROP non-tasters (pNTs). Thermal tasters (TTs) gave higher logged ratings than thermal non-tasters (TnTs) for all oral sensations including temperature, with the exception of metallic flavour (at low concentration) and PROP. Examination of ETA-squared values showed that PTS had a greater effect on perceived intensities than did TTS for most sensations. No PTSTTS interaction was found for any oral stimuli. In contrast with PTS, TTS was not associated with FP density, and neither PTS nor TTS were associated with SFR. We conclude that pSTs and TTs possess greater responsiveness across a range of taste and trigeminal stimuli and concentrations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18773913     DOI: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2008.08.009

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


  36 in total

1.  The associations between 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP) intensity and taste intensities differ by TAS2R38 haplotype.

Authors:  Mary E Fischer; Karen J Cruickshanks; James S Pankow; Nathan Pankratz; Carla R Schubert; Guan-Hua Huang; Barbara E K Klein; Ronald Klein; Alex Pinto
Journal:  J Nutrigenet Nutrigenomics       Date:  2015-01-27

2.  Explaining variability in sodium intake through oral sensory phenotype, salt sensation and liking.

Authors:  John E Hayes; Bridget S Sullivan; Valerie B Duffy
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2010-04-07

3.  Is the Association Between Sweet and Bitter Perception due to Genetic Variation?

Authors:  Liang-Dar Hwang; Paul A S Breslin; Danielle R Reed; Gu Zhu; Nicholas G Martin; Margaret J Wright
Journal:  Chem Senses       Date:  2016-11-01       Impact factor: 3.160

4.  Somatosensory factors in taste perception: effects of active tasting and solution temperature.

Authors:  Barry G Green; Danielle Nachtigal
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2012-05-17

5.  Sweet Thermal Taste: Perceptual Characteristics in Water and Dependence on TAS1R2/TAS1R3.

Authors:  Danielle Nachtigal; Barry G Green
Journal:  Chem Senses       Date:  2020-04-17       Impact factor: 3.160

6.  Predominant Qualities Evoked by Quinine, Sucrose, and Capsaicin Associate With PROP Bitterness, but not TAS2R38 Genotype.

Authors:  Alissa A Nolden; John E McGeary; John E Hayes
Journal:  Chem Senses       Date:  2020-05-29       Impact factor: 3.160

Review 7.  Two decades of supertasting: where do we stand?

Authors:  John E Hayes; Russell S J Keast
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2011-08-07

8.  Regional differences in suprathreshold intensity for bitter and umami stimuli.

Authors:  Emma L Feeney; John E Hayes
Journal:  Chemosens Percept       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 1.833

9.  Wine Expertise Predicts Taste Phenotype.

Authors:  John E Hayes; Gary J Pickering
Journal:  Am J Enol Vitic       Date:  2012-03-01       Impact factor: 2.253

10.  Thermal taster status: Evidence of cross-modal integration.

Authors:  Joanne Hort; Rebecca A Ford; Sally Eldeghaidy; Susan T Francis
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2016-03-07       Impact factor: 5.038

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.