Literature DB >> 21310764

Intranasal localizability of odorants: influence of stimulus volume.

J Frasnelli1, T Hummel, J Berg, G Huang, R L Doty.   

Abstract

When an odorant is presented to one side of the nose and air to the other, the ability to localize which side received the odorant depends upon trigeminal nerve stimulation. It has been shown that performance on this lateralization task increases as stimulus concentration increases. In this study, we determined the influences of stimulus volume and sex on the ability to localize each of 8 odorants presented at neat concentrations: anethole, geraniol, limonene, linalool, menthol, methyl salicylate, phenyl ethanol, and vanillin. At a low stimulus volume (11 mL), only menthol was localized at an above-chance level. At a high stimulus volume (21 mL), above-chance localization occurred for all odorants except vanillin. Women were significantly better than men in localizing menthol. Stimuli rated as most intense were those that were most readily localized. The detection performance measures, as well as rated intensity values, significantly correlated with earlier findings of the trigeminal detectability of odorants presented to anosmic and normosmic subjects. This study suggests that differences in stimulus volume may explain some discrepant findings within the trigeminal chemosensory literature and supports the concept that vanillin may be a "relatively pure" olfactory stimulus.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21310764      PMCID: PMC3105605          DOI: 10.1093/chemse/bjr001

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


  21 in total

1.  Event-related potentials to intranasal trigeminal stimuli change in relation to stimulus concentration and stimulus duration.

Authors:  Johannes Frasnelli; Jörn Lötsch; Thomas Hummel
Journal:  J Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 2.177

2.  OLFACTORY ANALOGUE TO DIRECTIONAL HEARING.

Authors:  G VONBEKESY
Journal:  J Appl Physiol       Date:  1964-05       Impact factor: 3.531

3.  Temporal integration in nasal lateralization and nasal detection of carbon dioxide.

Authors:  Paul M Wise; Tomas Radil; Charles J Wysocki
Journal:  Chem Senses       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 3.160

4.  Odor localization and sniffing.

Authors:  Johannes Frasnelli; Genevieve Charbonneau; Olivier Collignon; Franco Lepore
Journal:  Chem Senses       Date:  2008-11-11       Impact factor: 3.160

5.  Central processing of odor concentration is a temporal phenomenon as revealed by chemosensory event-related potentials (CSERP).

Authors:  B M Pause; B Sojka; R Ferstl
Journal:  Chem Senses       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 3.160

6.  Gender differences in the perception of pungency.

Authors:  J E Cometto-Muñiz; G Noriega
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  1985-03

7.  Thresholds for odor and nasal pungency.

Authors:  J E Cometto-Muñiz; W S Cain
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  1990-11

8.  Age-related decline of intranasal trigeminal sensitivity: is it a peripheral event?

Authors:  Johannes Frasnelli; Thomas Hummel
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2003-10-17       Impact factor: 3.252

9.  Development of the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test: a standardized microencapsulated test of olfactory function.

Authors:  R L Doty; P Shaman; M Dann
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  1984-03

10.  Intranasal trigeminal detection of chemical vapors by humans.

Authors:  R L Doty
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  1975-06
View more
  21 in total

1.  Stimulus selection for intranasal sensory isolation: eugenol is an irritant.

Authors:  Paul M Wise; Charles J Wysocki; Johan N Lundström
Journal:  Chem Senses       Date:  2012-01-31       Impact factor: 3.160

2.  Olfactory Network Differences in Master Sommeliers: Connectivity Analysis Using Granger Causality and Graph Theoretical Approach.

Authors:  Karthik Sreenivasan; Xiaowei Zhuang; Sarah J Banks; Virendra Mishra; Zhengshi Yang; Gopikrishna Deshpande; Dietmar Cordes
Journal:  Brain Connect       Date:  2017-03-01

3.  Perception of specific trigeminal chemosensory agonists.

Authors:  J Frasnelli; J Albrecht; B Bryant; J N Lundström
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  2011-05-07       Impact factor: 3.590

4.  FMRI correlates of olfactory processing in typically-developing school-aged children.

Authors:  Natalia M Kleinhans; Melissa Reilly; Matthew Blake; Gabriella Greco; Julia Sweigert; Greg E Davis; Francisco Velasquez; Fredrick Reitz; Dennis Shusterman; Stephen R Dager
Journal:  Psychiatry Res Neuroimaging       Date:  2018-12-02       Impact factor: 2.376

5.  [Diagnosis of olfactory disorders].

Authors:  V A Schriever; N Abolmaali; A Welge-Lüssen
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 1.284

6.  The scent of salience--is there olfactory-trigeminal conditioning in humans?

Authors:  C Moessnang; K Pauly; T Kellermann; J Krämer; A Finkelmeyer; T Hummel; S J Siegel; F Schneider; U Habel
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2013-04-02       Impact factor: 6.556

7.  Data-science based analysis of perceptual spaces of odors in olfactory loss.

Authors:  Jörn Lötsch; Alfred Ultsch; Antje Hähner; Vivien Willgeroth; Moustafa Bensafi; Andrea Zaliani; Thomas Hummel
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-05-19       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  Sniffing Fast: Paradoxical Effects on Odor Concentration Discrimination at the Levels of Olfactory Bulb Output and Behavior.

Authors:  Rebecca Jordan; Mihaly Kollo; Andreas T Schaefer
Journal:  eNeuro       Date:  2018-12-26

9.  Novel Behavioral Paradigm Reveals Lower Temporal Limits on Mouse Olfactory Decisions.

Authors:  Arbora Resulaj; Dmitry Rinberg
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2015-08-19       Impact factor: 6.167

10.  Dual processing streams in chemosensory perception.

Authors:  Johannes Frasnelli; Johan N Lundström; Veronika Schöpf; Simona Negoias; Thomas Hummel; Franco Lepore
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2012-10-19       Impact factor: 3.169

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.