What Aristotle didn't know about flavor.

Aristotle confused taste with flavor because he did not realize that chewing food releases odorants (volatiles) that rise up behind the palate and enter the nose from the rear (retronasal olfaction). When Aristotle bit into an apple, the flavor of the apple was perceptually localized to his mouth so he called it "taste." The correct attribution of flavor to the sense of olfaction was not made until 1812, and the term retronasal olfaction did not come into common use until 1984. Recent research has focused on interactions; tastes can change the perceived intensities of retronasal olfactory sensations and vice versa. In particular, some retronasal olfactory stimuli enhance sweet taste signals in the brain. In addition to sweetening foods (and reducing dependence on sugars and artificial sweeteners), retronasal olfaction can bypass damaged taste nerves and thus perhaps restore sweetness perception in patients. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Flavor Alterations Associated with Miracle Fruit and Gymnema sylvestre.

Taste and flavor (retronasal olfaction) interact in the brain. The rules of that interaction are not well understood. This study uses 2 taste modifiers that alter sweet to examine the effects on flavors. Subjects used the Global Sensory Intensity Scale to assess the aroma, sweetness, sourness, and flavor of 10 foods. As previous work had shown, miracle fruit added sweetness to acids, which secondarily reduced sourness (mixture suppression) and Gymnema sylvestre reduced sweetness in sweet foods as well as the sweetness induced by miracle fruit. In this study, multiple regression showed that both sweet and sour contribute to flavor. Gymnema sylvestre reduced the perceived sweet of predominantly sweet foods (chocolate and maple syrup) as expected; reducing the sweet, reduced the flavor. The effects of miracle fruit were complicated by its dual action: intensification of sweet and reduction of sour. Predominantly sour foods (vinegar, lemon, mustard, pickle) were sweetened by miracle fruit but any flavor enhancement associated with the added sweet appears to have been countered by the flavor reduction associated with reduced sourness. Moderately sour foods that are also sweet (tomatoes, strawberries) were sweetened by miracle fruit and thus flavor was enhanced; flavor loss through sour reduction was apparently not sufficient to counter the flavor enhancement due to increased sweet so the net result was that tomato and strawberry flavors were enhanced. The flavors of control foods (not predominantly sweet or sour [sausage, peanuts]) showed only small changes.

Oral sensory nerve damage: Causes and consequences.

Oral sensations (i.e., taste, oral somatosensation, retronasal olfaction) are integrated into a composite sense of flavor, which guides dietary choices with long-term health impact. The nerves carrying this input are vulnerable to peripheral damage from multiple sources (e.g., otitis media, tonsillectomy, head injury), and this regional damage can boost sensations elsewhere in the mouth because of central interactions among nerve targets. Mutual inhibition governs this compensatory process, but individual differences lead to variation in whole-mouth outcomes: some individuals are unaffected, others experience severe loss, and some encounter sensory increases that may (if experienced early in life) elevate sweet-fat palatability and body mass. Phantom taste, touch, or pain sensations (e.g., burning mouth syndrome) may also occur, particularly in those expressing the most taste buds. To identify and treat these conditions effectively, emerging clinical tests measure regional vs. whole-mouth sensation, stimulated vs. phantom cues, and oral anatomy. Scaling methods allowing valid group comparisons have strongly aided these efforts. Overall, advances in measuring oral sensory function in health and disease show promise for understanding the varied clinical consequences of nerve damage.

Comparison of the hedonic general Labeled Magnitude Scale with the hedonic 9-point scale.

The hedonic 9-point scale was designed to compare palatability among different food items; however, it has also been used occasionally to compare individuals and groups. Such comparisons can be invalid because scale labels (for example, "like extremely") can denote systematically different hedonic intensities across some groups. Addressing this problem, the hedonic general Labeled Magnitude Scale (gLMS) frames affective experience in terms of the strongest imaginable liking/disliking of any kind, which can yield valid group comparisons of food palatability provided extreme hedonic experiences are unrelated to food. For each scale, 200 panelists rated affect for remembered food products (including favorite and least favorite foods) and sampled foods; they also sampled taste stimuli (quinine, sucrose, NaCl, citric acid) and rated their intensity. Finally, subjects identified experiences representing the endpoints of the hedonic gLMS. Both scales were similar in their ability to detect within-subject hedonic differences across a range of food experiences, but group comparisons favored the hedonic gLMS. With the 9-point scale, extreme labels were strongly associated with extremes in food affect. In contrast, gLMS data showed that scale extremes referenced nonfood experiences. Perceived taste intensity significantly influenced differences in food liking/disliking (for example, those experiencing the most intense tastes, called supertasters, showed more extreme liking and disliking for their favorite and least favorite foods). Scales like the hedonic gLMS are suitable for across-group comparisons of food palatability.

Taste intensity in the Beaver Dam Offspring Study.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To determine the distribution of the perceived intensity of salt, sweet, sour, and bitter in a large population and to investigate factors associated with perceived taste intensity. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional population. METHODS: Subjects (n = 2,374; mean age, 48.8 years) were participants in the Beaver Dam Offspring Study examined during 2005 to 2008. Perceived taste intensity was measured using paper disks and a general labeled magnitude scale. Multiple linear regression was performed. RESULTS: Mean intensity ratings were: salt = 27.2 (standard deviation [SD] = 18.5), sweet = 20.4 (SD = 15.0), sour = 35.7 (SD = 21.4), and bitter = 49.6 (SD = 23.3). Females and those with less than a college degree education rated tastes stronger. With adjustment for age, sex, and education, stronger perceived sour and bitter intensities were related to current smoking (sour: B = 2.8, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.4 to 5.2; bitter: B = 2.8, 95% CI, 0.3 to 5.4) and lipid-lowering medications (sour: B = 5.1, 95% CI, 2.5 to 7.6; bitter: B = 3.2, 95% CI, 0.6 to 5.8). Alcohol consumption in the past year was related to weaker salt (B = -2.8, 95% CI, -5.3 to -0.3) and sweet intensity ratings (B = -2.3, 95% CI, -4.3 to -0.3), whereas olfactory impairment was associated with higher sweet ratings (B = 4.7, 95% CI, 1.4 to 7.9). CONCLUSIONS: Perceived intensities were strongest for bitter and weakest for sweet. Sex and education were associated with each taste, whereas age did not demonstrate a consistent relationship. Associations with other factors differed by tastants, with current smoking and alcohol consumption being related to some tastes.

Intensity of Salt Taste and Prevalence of Hypertension Are Not Related in the Beaver Dam Offspring Study.

BACKGROUND: Standard clinical advice for the prevention and treatment of hypertension includes limitation of salt intake. Previous studies of the association between perception of salt taste and hypertension prevalence have not reported consistent results and have usually been conducted in small study populations. PURPOSE: To determine the cross-sectional relationship between intensity of salt taste, discretionary salt use, and hypertension. METHODS: Subjects (n=2371, mean age=48.8 years) were participants in the Beaver Dam Offspring Study (BOSS), an investigation of sensory loss and aging conducted in 2005-2008. Salt taste intensity was measured using a filter paper disk impregnated with 1.0 M sodium chloride and a general Labeled Magnitude Scale (gLMS). Hypertension was defined as systolic blood pressure ≥ 140 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure ≥ 90 mmHg, or use of high blood pressure medication. RESULTS: Nearly 32% of the participants rated the salt disk as weak or having no taste while approximately 10% considered it to be very strong or stronger. The intensity was reported to be less strong by males (P < 0.001) and college graduates (P = 0.02) and was inversely associated with frequency of adding salt to foods (P = 0.02). There was no significant association between hypertension and the intensity of salt taste, before and after adjustment for covariates. Exclusion of subjects with a history of physician diagnosed hypertension did not appreciably alter these findings. CONCLUSIONS: The perception of salt taste was related to the frequency of discretionary salt use but not to hypertension status or mean blood pressure.

Taste damage (otitis media, tonsillectomy and head and neck cancer), oral sensations and BMI.

Otitis media and tonsillectomy are associated with enhanced palatability of energy dense foods and with weight gain. Otitis media can damage the chorda tympani nerve (CN VII); tonsillectomy and head and neck radiation treatment can damage the glossopharyngeal nerve (CN IX). Both of these nerves function prominently in taste sensation. The present study utilizes these sources of damage to study central interactions among the nerves that mediate oral sensations. Mild damage restricted to one of these nerves can actually intensify sensations evoked from undamaged nerves (i.e., whole-mouth taste, oral tactile sensations evoked by fats and irritants). These intensifications may result from disruption of central inhibitory taste circuits, as taste damage appears to disinhibit other oral sensory nerves. In addition, mild damage restricted to one taste nerve can intensify odors perceived from foods in the mouth during chewing and swallowing (i.e., retronasal olfaction); this may be a secondary consequence of the intensification of whole-mouth taste. Damage to both nerves leads to widespread oral sensory loss. At present, the link between sensory alterations and weight gain has not been established for adults (e.g., does increased fat preference occur in individuals with oral sensory intensifications, those with losses, or both?). Finally, pain in non-oral locations is also related to taste loss. When participants rated "the most intense pain of any kind they had ever experienced," those with the greatest taste loss gave the highest ratings. These effects suggest that taste loss significantly influences long-term health outcomes.

The chemical interactions underlying tomato flavor preferences.

Although human perception of food flavors involves integration of multiple sensory inputs, the most salient sensations are taste and olfaction. Ortho- and retronasal olfaction are particularly crucial to flavor because they provide the qualitative diversity so important to identify safe versus dangerous foods. Historically, flavor research has prioritized aroma volatiles present at levels exceeding the orthonasally measured odor threshold, ignoring the variation in the rate at which odor intensities grow above threshold. Furthermore, the chemical composition of a food in itself tells us very little about whether or not that food will be liked. Clearly, alternative approaches are needed to elucidate flavor chemistry. Here we use targeted metabolomics and natural variation in flavor-associated sugars, acids, and aroma volatiles to evaluate the chemistry of tomato fruits, creating a predictive and testable model of liking. This nontraditional approach provides novel insights into flavor chemistry, the interactions between taste and retronasal olfaction, and a paradigm for enhancing liking of natural products. Some of the most abundant volatiles do not contribute to consumer liking, whereas other less abundant ones do. Aroma volatiles make contributions to perceived sweetness independent of sugar concentration, suggesting a novel way to increase perception of sweetness without adding sugar.

Epidemiological studies of taste function: discussion and perspectives.

Efforts to quantify the public health impact of chemosensation present significant challenges, including a strong need for testing methods suitable for field assessment. This discussion highlights several promising approaches to the population-based study of taste function; it also identifies key principles that should be considered when adapting laboratory-based taste tests for field use.

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

Psychophysical comparisons seem to show that obese individuals experience normal sweet and fat sensations, they like sweetness the same or less, but like fat more than the non-obese do. These psychophysical comparisons have been made using scales (visual analogue or category) that assume intensity labels (e.g. extremely) which denote the same absolute perceived intensity to all. In reality, the perceived intensities denoted by labels vary because they depend on experiences with the substances to be judged. This variation makes comparisons invalid. Valid comparisons can be made by asking the subjects to rate their sensory/hedonic experiences in contexts that are not related to the specific experiences of interest. Using this methodology, we present the evidence that the sensory and hedonic properties of sweet and fat vary with body mass index. The obese live in different orosensory and orohedonic worlds than do the non-obese; the obese experience reduced sweetness, which probably intensifies fat sensations, and the obese like both sweet and fat more than the non-obese do. Genetic variation as well as taste pathology contribute to these results. These psychophysical advances will impact experimental as well as clinical studies of obesity and other eating disorders.

Modern psychophysics and the assessment of human oral sensation.

Psychophysical measures attempt to capture and compare subjective experiences objectively. In the chemical senses, these techniques have been instrumental in describing relationships between oral sensation and health risk, but they are often used incorrectly to make group comparisons. This chapter reviews contemporary methods of oral sensory assessment, with particular emphasis on suprathreshold scaling. We believe that these scales presently offer the most realistic picture of oral sensory function, but only when they are used correctly. Using converging methods from psychophysics, anatomy, and genetics, we demonstrate valid uses of modern chemosensory testing in clinical diagnosis and intervention.

Bitter receptor gene (TAS2R38), 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP) bitterness and alcohol intake.

BACKGROUND: Phenylthiocarbamide (PTC) and 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP), chemically related compounds, are probes for genetic variation in bitter taste, although PROP is safer with less sulfurous odor. Threshold for PROP distinguishes nontasters (increased threshold) from tasters (lower threshold); perceived intensity subdivides tasters into medium tasters (PROP is bitter) and supertasters (PROP is very bitter). Compared with supertasters, nontasters have fewer taste papillae on the anterior tongue (fungiform papillae) and experience less negative (e.g., bitterness) and more positive (eg, sweetness) sensations from alcohol. We determined whether the TAS2R38 gene at 7q36 predicted PROP bitterness, alcohol sensation and use. METHODS: Healthy adults (53 women, 31 men; mean age 36 years)--primarily light and moderate drinkers--reported the bitterness of five PROP concentrations (0.032-3.2 mM) and intensity of 50% ethanol on the general Labeled Magnitude Scale. PROP threshold and density of fungiform papillae were also measured. Subjects had common TAS2R38 gene haplotypes [alanine-valine-isoleucine (AVI) and proline-alanine-valine (PAV)]. RESULTS: PROP bitterness varied significantly across genotypes with repeated measures ANOVA: 26 AVI/AVI homozygotes tasted less bitterness than either 37 PAV/AVI heterozygotes or 21 PAV/PAV homozygotes. The PAV/PAV group exceeded the PAV/AVI group for bitterness only for the top PROP concentrations. The elevated bitterness was musch less than if we defined the groups using psychophysical criteria. With multiple regression analyses, greater bitterness from 3.2 mM PROP was a significant predictor of greater ethanol intensity and less alcohol intake--effects separate from age and sex. Genotype was a significant predictor of alcohol intake, but not ethanol intensity. With ANOVA, AVI/AVI homozygotes reported higher alcohol use than either PAV/AVI heterozygotes or PAV/PAV homozygotes. When age effects were minimized, PROP bitterness explained more variance in alcohol intake than did the TAS2R38 genotype. CONCLUSIONS: These results support taste genetic effects on alcohol intake. PROP bitterness serves as a marker of these effects.