The prevalence of androstenone anosmia
- PMID: 12826538
- DOI: 10.1093/chemse/28.5.423
The prevalence of androstenone anosmia
Abstract
It has been estimated that approximately 30% of the population is unable to detect the odor of androstenone. These estimates, however, were made using tests and criteria optimized for identifying detection. Such criteria favor Type II over Type I errors--that is, they are excellent at identifying true detectors at the cost of erroneously labeling some detectors as non-detectors. Because these criteria were used to identify non-detectors, it is possible that the rate of non-detection may have been overestimated. To test this we screened 55 subjects for non-detection employing previously used methods. This screen yielded nine putative non-detectors, a 16.3% putative non-detection rate. We then retested these putative non-detectors using a forced choice (yes-no) paradigm to obtain a precise measure of their sensitivity. We found that this group of putative non-detectors was significantly above chance at detecting androstenone (P < 0.001), despite very low self-confidence in their performance. Based on the results of the signal detection analysis in this sample, we estimate the rate of actual androstenone non-detection in young healthy adults is between 1.8 and 5.96%, which is significantly lower than previously estimated. This finding is significant considering the implications of specific anosmias on the understanding of odor discrimination.
Similar articles
-
On the trigeminal percept of androstenone and its implications on the rate of specific anosmia.J Neurobiol. 2006 Nov;66(13):1501-10. doi: 10.1002/neu.20294. J Neurobiol. 2006. PMID: 17013929
-
Assessment of olfactory function and androstenone odor thresholds in humans with or without functional occlusion of the vomeronasal duct.Behav Neurosci. 2003 Dec;117(6):1135-41. doi: 10.1037/0735-7044.117.6.1135. Behav Neurosci. 2003. PMID: 14674834 Clinical Trial.
-
Individual differences in the perceived intensity and quality of specific odors following self- and cross-adaptation.Chem Senses. 1994 Jun;19(3):197-208. doi: 10.1093/chemse/19.3.197. Chem Senses. 1994. PMID: 8055270
-
Chemical senses.Annu Rev Psychol. 1994;45:419-49. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ps.45.020194.002223. Annu Rev Psychol. 1994. PMID: 8135507 Review.
-
New chemosensory component in the U.S. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES): first-year results for measured olfactory dysfunction.Rev Endocr Metab Disord. 2016 Jun;17(2):221-40. doi: 10.1007/s11154-016-9364-1. Rev Endocr Metab Disord. 2016. PMID: 27287364 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
An olfactory demography of a diverse metropolitan population.BMC Neurosci. 2012 Oct 10;13:122. doi: 10.1186/1471-2202-13-122. BMC Neurosci. 2012. PMID: 23046643 Free PMC article.
-
Sex Differences in Odor Hedonic Perception: An Overview.Front Neurosci. 2021 Oct 18;15:764520. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2021.764520. eCollection 2021. Front Neurosci. 2021. PMID: 34733137 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Health Risk Perception, Consumption Intention, and Willingness to Pay for Pig Products Obtained by Immunocastration.Animals (Basel). 2020 Sep 1;10(9):1548. doi: 10.3390/ani10091548. Animals (Basel). 2020. PMID: 32883019 Free PMC article.
-
Functional evolution of mammalian odorant receptors.PLoS Genet. 2012;8(7):e1002821. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1002821. Epub 2012 Jul 12. PLoS Genet. 2012. PMID: 22807691 Free PMC article.
-
Effect of the rs2821557 Polymorphism of the Human Kv1.3 Gene on Olfactory Function and BMI in Different Age Groups.Nutrients. 2024 Mar 13;16(6):821. doi: 10.3390/nu16060821. Nutrients. 2024. PMID: 38542732 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
