Electro-Olfactograms in Humans in Response to Ortho- and Retronasal Chemosensory Stimulation

Aim Ortho- and retronasal olfaction represent two aspects of a shared sensory system yet evoke different sensations. The differences between ortho- and retronasal olfaction have triggered a number of studies during the past years, which pointed towards a decreased sensitivity to odors presented thro...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Chemosensory perception 2017-12, Vol.10 (4), p.114-118
Main Authors: Hummel, Thomas, Seo, Han-Seok, Pellegrino, Roberto, Heilmann, Stefan
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Alcohol
Alcohols
Carbon dioxide
Chemistry
Chemistry and Materials Science
Chemoreception
Clinical Nutrition
Food Science
Hydrogen sulfide
Neurosciences
Odors
Olfaction
Olfactory epithelium
Phenylethyl alcohol
Psychophysics
Sensory stimulation
Smell
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Aim Ortho- and retronasal olfaction represent two aspects of a shared sensory system yet evoke different sensations. The differences between ortho- and retronasal olfaction have triggered a number of studies during the past years, which pointed towards a decreased sensitivity to odors presented through the retronasal olfactory pathway. Especially intensity was reported to be lower after retronasal olfactory stimulation. The aim of this study was to investigate how this compares to activation at the level of the olfactory epithelium in humans. Methods Trigeminal (CO 2 ) and olfactory (H 2 S, phenylethyl alcohol) stimuli were presented ortho- and retronasally. Electro-olfactograms (EOG) in response to chemosensory stimulation were recorded in 10 participants (6 women, 4 men, mean age 23.4 years). Results Typical EOGs were demonstrable after either orthonasal or retronasal stimulation across the stimulus qualities. Overall, EOG amplitudes to retronasal stimulation were smaller when compared to those to orthonasal stimulation, but a significant difference was obtained only in phenylethyl alcohol ( p  = 0.048). Conclusions The present data indicate that the perceptual differences between ortho- and retronasal olfaction may start at the level of the olfactory epithelium. The data support the idea that the intensity of physically identical stimuli is lower after retronasal stimulation compared to orthonasal stimulus presentation for both olfactory and trigeminal stimuli. Implications The current electrophysiological results are in line with reported differences in psychophysical properties of retro- and orthonasal stimulations meaning that different sensations are elicit through these two channels although the same molecule is presented.
ISSN:1936-5802
1936-5810
DOI:10.1007/s12078-016-9217-z