The final issue, addressed only in Experiment 1, was whether the relationship between orthonasal perception of an odour and its effect as a flavorant in a sweet solution depends on the concentration of the odour. Evidence for increasing sweetness enhancement has been found when concentrations of peach Cliff and Noble, and strawberry Schifferstein and Verlegh, flavorants were increased. The aim here was to see whether such sensitivity to concentration would be found under the conditions employed in the present study.
The basic design of this experiment was to select on the basis of pilot studies a set of stimuli which would provide five food-like and five non-food-like odours with sweetness and sourness ratings covering a large overall range. To investigate the effects of concentration a further two odours were included which had been used in our previous studies of associative factors, namely, lychee and water chestnut.
In the main part of the experiment subjects were given four blocks of trials, in each of which they were asked to rate a set of odours when sniffed and then rate a set of sucrose solutions, sampled orally, to which these odours had been added as flavorants. The primary question addressed here was the degree to which the odour ratings obtained in the first part of each trial block predicted the ratings of flavoured solutions in the second.
Thirty-one subjects mean age No subject reported having a cold or other respiratory tract infection in the week prior to testing. Twenty experimental odours and three context-setting odours were used in the experiment. Table 1 illustrates names, concentrations and sources of all odorants. Pilot studies were used to establish approximately equal intensities between odours and to identify if any odour had an actual taste odours were sampled by mouth with the nose pinched.
Maltol was found to taste bitter. Context-setting tastes 0. In addition to water chestnut and lychee, five odours were selected as food related and five as non-food related. Those classified as non-food included at least one flavour used in wine damascone , but when sampled out of context this flavour is not readily identifiable.
The tasted solutions consisted of the 20 experimental odours at the same concentrations in 0. Odours were presented in ml polypropylene wash bottles which were stoppered after use. Odour bottles were replenished with the odorant every morning preceding testing.
Tastes and odours were presented in transparent 22 ml disposable sample cups 10 ml samples of each solution. Subjects were given four consecutive blocks of tests, the order of which was counterbalanced using the Williams square Edwards, Each block consisted of a smelling phase and then a tasting phase. Five target odours were then smelled and rated in counterbalanced order. Following this, the tasting phase began. Two context-setting tastes were sampled 0.
Then the five odours smelt in the first part of the block were sampled this time as flavorants in 0. Each of these was tasted, expectorated and then rated, in counterbalanced order. The procedure of alternating periods of tasting and smelling was adopted to reduce adaptation and fatigue.
At the start of the experiment, subjects were instructed in the use of the rating scales. For odours, these consisted of four The only difference in the ratings scales used for tastes and odours was that the three final questions described above were omitted.
This rating procedure was modelled on that used by Stevenson et al. Stevenson et al. After subjects had read the instructions, the experimenter carefully reiterated their content. The option of using zero ratings was carefully stressed. Subjects were then shown how to smell the odours.
A minimum time of 45 s separated subsequent odour presentations. Subjects were given a new set of instructions after completing the smelling phase of the first test block. These repeated the original instructions for using the scales and informed subjects that solutions were to be gently swilled and then expectorated.
Ratings were made immediately after expectoration. Subjects then completed at least one water rinse more if they desired and at least 45 s separated subsequent samples. Subjects were also given a 5 min break after completing their second block of tests, during which they were provided with plain crackers and more mineral water.
Figure 1a—d illustrates the sweetness ratings for the various odour—sucrose combinations, relative to sucrose alone. An ANOVA was conducted on each figure's data to compare the mean sweetness of plain sucrose collapsed across all four ratings taken of plain sucrose and the flavoured sucrose solutions.
Mango exerted no significant effect. Acetyl methyl carbamol and eucalyptol exerted no significant effect on sweetness ratings.
There was some indication that the three strongest concentrations also acted to enhance sweetness t s respectively 1.
However, the second weakest solution exerted no significant effect LY 2 on Figure 1c. Finally, there were no significant differences between solutions for the water chestnut series see Figure 1d. To determine the best predictor of an odour's ability to enhance the sweetness of sucrose, a regression analysis was conducted. The mean tasted sweetness of the odour—sucrose mixtures formed the dependent variable and the mean smelled characteristics of each odour sweetness, sourness, liking, overall intensity formed the independent variables.
Maltol was excluded from this analysis because of its large studentized residual. The best solution is illustrated in Table 2 , along with the associated regression coefficients B and significance tests t. The solution involved two variables, odour sweetness and odour intensity.
Both significantly contributed to the model, with odour sweetness the most important predictor based on ranking by the squared semi-partial correlation coefficient see Table 2. Although odour sweetness was significantly correlated with the dependent variable, tasted sweetness, intensity was not. Thus, removing variations in odour intensity allows odour sweetness to explain more of the variation in tasted sweetness. To check the validity of this solution all the adjusted multiple R 2 and sums of squares were calculated for all the possible models 15 in total.
The highest adjusted multiple R 2 was provided by odour sweetness, odour liking and odour overall intensity However, this did not differ significantly from the simpler solution reached by the forward stepwise method. Repeated use of the same odorant at different concentrations namely lychee and water chestnut did not unduly influence the regression model, as the best solution was still odour sweetness and odour overall intensity, when the three intermediate concentrations of lychee and water chestnut were omitted.
Pierce Laboratory in New Haven, Conn. In a classic experiment, French researchers colored a white wine red with an odorless dye and asked a panel of wine experts to describe its taste. The connoisseurs described the wine using typical red wine descriptors rather than terms they would use to evaluate white wine, suggesting that the color played a significant role in the way they perceived the drink.
Although sight is not technically part of taste, it certainly influences perception. Interestingly, food and drink are identified predominantly by the senses of smell and sight, not taste. Food can be identified by sight alone—we don't have to eat a strawberry to know it is a strawberry.
The same goes for smell, in many cases. To our brains, "taste" is actually a fusion of a food's taste, smell and touch into a single sensation. This combination of qualities takes place because during chewing or sipping, all sensory information originates from a common location: whatever it is we're snacking on.
Further, "flavor" is a more accurate term for what we commonly refer to as taste; therefore, smell not only influences but is an integral part of flavor. The taste of umami, also known as savoriness, is attributable to the taste of the amino acid L-glutamate. In fact, monosodium glutamate, or MSG, is often used in cooking to enhance the savory taste of certain foods. The adaptive value of being able to distinguish umami is that savory substances tend to be high in protein.
All odors that we perceive are molecules in the air we breathe. If a substance does not release molecules into the air from its surface, it has no smell. If a human or other animal does not have a receptor that recognizes a specific molecule, then that molecule has no smell.
Humans have about olfactory receptor subtypes that work in various combinations to allow us to sense about 10, different odors. Compare that to mice, for example, which have about 1, olfactory receptor types and, therefore, probably sense many more odors.
Uniform distribution of taste receptors the myth of the tongue map : Humans detect taste using receptors called taste buds. Recent evidence suggests that taste receptors are uniformly distributed across the tongue; thus, this traditional tongue map is no longer valid. The senses of smell and taste combine at the back of the throat.
When you taste something before you smell it, the smell lingers internally up to the nose causing you to smell it. Both smell and taste use chemoreceptors, which essentially means they are both sensing the chemical environment. This chemoreception in regards to taste, occurs via the presence of specialized taste receptors within the mouth that are referred to as taste cells and are bundled together to form taste buds.
These taste buds, located in papillae which are found across the tongue, are specific for the five modalities: salt, sweet, sour, bitter and umami. These receptors are activated when their specific stimulus i.
In addition to the activation of the taste receptors, there are similar receptors within the nose that coordinates with activation of the taste receptors. When you eat something, you can tell the difference between sweet and bitter. It is the sense of smell that is used to distinguish the difference.
Although humans commonly distinguish taste as one sense and smell as another, they work together to create the perception of flavor. The olfactory system creates an image for the mixture and stores it in memory just as it does for the odor of a single molecule Shepherd, There is tremendous variation in the sensitivity of the olfactory systems of different species.
We often think of dogs as having far superior olfactory systems than our own, and indeed, dogs can do some remarkable things with their noses. Pheromonal communication often involves providing information about the reproductive status of a potential mate. So, for example, when a female rat is ready to mate, she secretes pheromonal signals that draw attention from nearby male rats.
There has also been a good deal of research and controversy about pheromones in humans Comfort, ; Russell, ; Wolfgang-Kimball, ; Weller, Think about the last time you were seriously congested due to a cold or the flu.
What changes did you notice in the flavors of the foods that you ate during this time? Privacy Policy.
0コメント