Literature DB >> 479396

Evidence for neural inhibition in bittersweet taste mixtures.

H T Lawless.   

Abstract

Three lines of evidence from psychophysical experiments implied that mutual suppression of bitter and sweet tastes is due to neural inhibition rather than chemical interactions in solution or competition of molecules for common receptor sites. Removal of sweetness from bittersweet mixtures caused the bitterness to increase. This was accomplished by adaptation to sucrose or by treatment with Gymnema sylvestre, neither of which affect the concentration of sucrose on the tongue. Such increases in the bitterness of mixtures, independent of the concentration of the sweet masking substance, are difficult to reconcile with suppression by means of chemical interactions. Similar dependence of suppression on perceived intensity (and independence from concentration) was observed with mixtures of phyenylthiocarbamide and sucrose. Tasters of phenylthiocarbamide showed stronger suppression of sweetness than nontasters. This result was also inconsistent with molecular interactions causing suppression, which would have resulted in the same degree of suppression for the two groups. Instead, these findings support neural explanations of mixture suppression, such as antidromic inhibition or occlusion.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1979        PMID: 479396     DOI: 10.1037/h0077582

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comp Physiol Psychol        ISSN: 0021-9940


  40 in total

1.  Perceptual integration of tertiary taste mixtures.

Authors:  R L McBride; D C Finlay
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1990-10

2.  The effectiveness of different sweeteners in suppressing citric acid sourness.

Authors:  H N Schifferstein; J E Frijters
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1991-01

3.  Allelic variation in TAS2R bitter receptor genes associates with variation in sensations from and ingestive behaviors toward common bitter beverages in adults.

Authors:  John E Hayes; Margaret R Wallace; Valerie S Knopik; Deborah M Herbstman; Linda M Bartoshuk; Valerie B Duffy
Journal:  Chem Senses       Date:  2010-12-16       Impact factor: 3.160

4.  Bitter avoidance in guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus) and mice (Mus musculus and Peromyscus leucopus).

Authors:  Kristin L Field; Gary K Beauchamp; Bruce A Kimball; Julie A Mennella; Alexander A Bachmanov
Journal:  J Comp Psychol       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 2.231

5.  Effects of selective adaptation on coding sugar and salt tastes in mixtures.

Authors:  Marion E Frank; Holly F Goyert; Bradley K Formaker; Thomas P Hettinger
Journal:  Chem Senses       Date:  2012-05-04       Impact factor: 3.160

6.  Interpreting consumer preferences: physicohedonic and psychohedonic models yield different information in a coffee-flavored dairy beverage.

Authors:  Bangde Li; John E Hayes; Gregory R Ziegler
Journal:  Food Qual Prefer       Date:  2014-09-01       Impact factor: 5.565

Review 7.  Molecular gastronomy: a new emerging scientific discipline.

Authors:  Peter Barham; Leif H Skibsted; Wender L P Bredie; Michael Bom Frøst; Per Møller; Jens Risbo; Pia Snitkjaer; Louise Mørch Mortensen
Journal:  Chem Rev       Date:  2010-04-14       Impact factor: 60.622

8.  Determinants of cumulative successive contrast in saltiness intensity judgments.

Authors:  H N Schifferstein; I M Oudejans
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1996-07

Review 9.  Evaluation of Sweetener Synergy in Humans by Isobole Analyses.

Authors:  M Michelle Reyes; Stephen A Gravina; John E Hayes
Journal:  Chem Senses       Date:  2019-10-17       Impact factor: 3.160

10.  Using milk fat to reduce the irritation and bitter taste of ibuprofen.

Authors:  Samantha M Bennett; Lisa Zhou; John E Hayes
Journal:  Chemosens Percept       Date:  2012-05-01       Impact factor: 1.833

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.