93 Poster <strong>Chemosensory</strong> Coding and ClinicalOLFACTORY EVENT-RELATED FUNCTIONAL MAGNETICRESONANCE IMAGING STUDY IN YOUNG ADULTSNi D. 1 , Liu J. 2 1 Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing,China; 2 Dept.of Otolaryngology, Peking Union Medical CollegeHospital, Beijing, ChinaObjectives: to explore brain activation mapping following odorpresentation with event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging.Methods: experiments were performed on 10 healthy young volunteersaged from 18 to 28 (5 men and 5 women). Odorant isoamyl acetate wasdelivered by olfactometer synchronously with inspiration birhinally for10 times with interstimulus interval 60 seconds. fMRI method based onthe blood-oxygen-level dependent effect were carried out on a 3.0 Tscanner, using gradient-echo EPI technique. Results: Bilateralactivations of the orbitofrontal cortex, anterior cingulated cortex,piriform cortex, insular cortex, amygdala, thalamus, the basal nuclei,temple cortex, frontal cortex seen. A greater extent of activation wasevident in the right frontal cortex and left orbitofrontal cortex.Conclusions: Olfactory event-related fMRI is an objective measurementof olfaction, and has potential clinical significance.94 Poster <strong>Chemosensory</strong> Coding and ClinicalHEDONIC-SPECIFIC TEMPORAL PATTERN OF RESPONSEIN PRIMARY OLFACTORY CORTEX OF HUMANSZelano C. 1 , Khan R. 2 , Sobel N. 2 1 Biophysics, University of California,Berkeley, Berkeley, CA; 2 Neuroscience, University of California,Berkeley, CAEvidence suggests that the primary perceptual axis of odor is valence,or how pleasant or unpleasant an odor is. Although human imagingstudies have consistently found that this primary perceptual axis isreflected in orbitofrontal cortex (secondary olfactory cortex), it is notknown whether or how it is reflected in primary olfactory cortex. Weset out to probe this Using fMRI. Subjects were presented with twopleasant odorants (strawberry and citral) and two unpleasant odorants(hydrogensulfide and propionic acid). Odorants were chosen such thatthe pleasant and unpleasant groups contained trigeminal and nontrigeminalodorants. In data from a single subject, we find thattrigeminal odorants elicited significantly lower amplitude BOLDresponse. We also found that unpleasant odorants had significantlygreater full-width-at-half-height, and therefore a much lower slope. Thisresult implies that the hedonic value of odors might be temporallyencoded at the level of primary olfactory cortex. Funding: cz funded byNSFGRFP95 Poster <strong>Chemosensory</strong> Coding and ClinicalTHE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN OLFACTORY RECOGNITIONMEMORY PERFORMANCE AND BRAIN ACTIVATION INOLDER MALES AND FEMALES: AN FMRI STUDYWang M. 1 , Cerf-Ducastel B. 1 , Pirogovsky E. 1 , Sundermann E. 1 , RattnerK. 1 , Allmon T. 1 , Miller M. 1 , Hackbarth J. 1 , Murphy C. 2 1 San DiegoState University, San Diego, CA; 2 San Diego State University andUCSD Medical School, San Diego, CAThe present study investigated associations between olfactoryrecognition memory performance during fMRI scanning sessions andbrain activation among healthy older adults (10 males, 10 females).Each subject was presented 16 odors immediately prior to entering thescanner. During two functional runs at 3T, target and foil names ofodors were presented and each subject responded via button boxwhether or not each name corresponded with an odor presented to them.Older females demonstrated significantly higher performance on thediscriminability index (d´) than older males, consonant with a higherfalse positive rate of males during functional run 1. The d´ for femaleswas negatively correlated with activation in left parahippocampal gyrusand superior frontal gyrus and positively correlated with bilateralactivation in fusiform gyrus. The d´ for males was positively correlatedwith activation in left parahippocampal gyrus and negatively correlatedwith activation in right superior frontal gyrus. The false positive rate ofmales was positively correlated with activation in bilateral superiorfrontal gyrus and right parahippocampal gyrus and was negativelycorrelated with right medial frontal gyrus. For females, there were nosignificant correlations between false positive rate and brain activation.This study suggests greater impairment in odor recognition memory inolder males that is associated with patterns of cortical activity in frontaland temporal areas. Supported by NIH grant #AG04085 to CM.96 Poster <strong>Chemosensory</strong> Coding and ClinicalOLFACTORY PERCEPTUAL LEARNING IN HUMANPIRIFORM AND ORBITOFRONTAL CORTEXGottfried J.A. 1 , Li W. 1 , Luxenberg E. 2 , Howard J. 1 1 Neurology,Northwestern University, Chicago, IL; 2 Linguistics, Duke University,Durham, NCEnhancement in sensory acuity as a result of experience is known asperceptual learning. In humans olfactory perceptual learning is criticalto the development of odor discrimination and identification, but theunderlying neural correlates remain poorly defined. Using a crosshabituationparadigm and functional magnetic resonance imaging, weexamined the neural substrates in human piriform and orbitofrontalcortex (OFC) for perceptual learning to odorants qualitatively (QR) orstructurally (SR) related to an odorant destined for habituation (TG). 16subjects smelled TG, QR, SR odorants, and an unrelated control odorant(CT), before and after 3.5-min continuous exposure to TG. Behavioraland neural markers of habituation to the TG odorant were observed inthe form of reduced intensity ratings and progressive signal decline inpiriform cortex. Perceptual learning, indexed as a decrease in similarityratings from pre- to post-habituation, was evident for the TG/QR andTG/SR pairs, but not for the TG/CT pair. In parallel to these behavioraleffects, we observed increased neural activity (from pre- to posthabituation)in piriform cortex for QR and in OFC for both QR and SR,in comparison to CT. Importantly, the increased activity to QR and SRin OFC significantly predicted the subsequent enhancement of odordiscrimination. The data provide robust evidence for olfactoryperceptual learning in human piriform cortex and OFC. These findingsimply that sensory-specific representations of odor quality or structurein piriform and OFC are flexible and can be rapidly updated by mereperceptual experience. Funding: Northwestern Univ.24
97 Poster <strong>Chemosensory</strong> Coding and ClinicalTHE EFFECTS OF SLEEP QUALITY ON OLFACTORYEVENT-RELATED POTENTIALS IN HEALTHY ADULTSEssoe J.K. 1 , Ramage E. 1 , Parks A.M. 1 , Lloyd K. 1 , Hunt K. 1 , GeislerM.W. 1 1 Psychology, San Francisco State University, San Francisco,CAPast research established that the amount of sleep (quantity) effectsmany indices of cognitive performance, including event-related brainpotentials (ERP's); however, there is a paucity of research on how thecharacteristics of sleep (quality) may affect sensory perception andcognition. This study measured amplitude and latency in response toolfactory ERP's and odor threshold scores using the odorant amylacetate, and subjective ratings of odor intensity in 26 (9 male, 17female) good sleepers (GS) and 13 (7 male, 6 female) poor sleepers(PS) as measured by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). Greateramplitudes for early stimulus detection (N1 component) were found inGS as compared to PS, while greater amplitudes for early sensoryprocessing (P2), and later cognitive olfactory information processing(P3) were found in PS as compared to GS, with no significantdifferences in latencies found. Left nostril olfactory threshold sensitivitywas significantly impaired in PS as compared to GS, and subjectiveodor intensity ratings revealed no significant differences between sleepquality groups. These results suggest that greater neuronal resources areallocated toward early sensory detection and may be a benefit of goodsleep quality. However, there appears to be a hyper-arousal in earlysensory processing, and the later cognitive processing as a result ofpoorer sleep quality. Thus, sleep quality may play an important role inenabling the brain to detect olfactory stimuli more accurately, and toprocess and interpret the stimuli more efficiently.98 Poster <strong>Chemosensory</strong> Coding and ClinicalECHO TIME DEPENDENCE OF BOLD FMRI STUDIES OFTHE PIRIFORM CORTEXKopietz R. 1 , Albrecht J. 1 , Linn J. 1 , Sakar V. 1 , Pollatos O. 1 , Anzinger A. 1 ,May J. 1 , Wesemann T. 1 , Fesl G. 1 , Kobal G. 2 , Wiesmann M. 1 1 Dept. ofNeuroradiology, University of Munich, Munich, Germany; 2 SensoryResearch R&T, Philip Morris USA Inc., Richmond, VAObjectives: In FMRI studies brain areas commonly associated withthe processing of olfactory stimuli are often obscured by susceptibilityinducedsignal loss. We hypothesized that decreasing the echo time(TE) should not only reduce the susceptibility artifacts but also increasethe overall signal-to-noise ratio and allow us to retrieve a BOLD signalin regions normally affected by these artifacts. Methods: We comparedtwo gradient echo sequences with echo times of 60 and 32 ms withintwo experimental paradigms: a standard motor paradigm (n = 12) andan olfactory stimulation paradigm (n = 11). Comparisons were done bymeasuring signal intensity changes in defined regions of interest andcounting local activation maxima. Results and Conclusions: Reducingthe TE decreased geometrical distortions and signal drop-out atorbitofrontal and temporomesial brain areas. At TE = 32 ms signalintensity changes were reduced by 51% in the motor cortex (motorparadigm), but also by 48% in the piriform cortex (olfactory paradigm).Moreover, piriform activations were detected in less subjects at TE = 32ms than at TE = 60 ms. We conclude that although shortening TEreduces signal drop-outs, it is not sufficient to recover the BOLD signalfrom regions affected by susceptibility artifacts such as the piriformcortex and can not be recommended for olfactory FMRI studies.Research described in this abstract was supported by Philip MorrisUSA Inc.99 Poster <strong>Chemosensory</strong> Coding and ClinicalCONTRIBUTION OF THE LATERAL ORBITOFRONTALCORTEX TO PROCESSING OF BINARY ODOR MIXTUREBoyle J.A. 1 , Olsson M.J. 2 , Lundstrom J.N. 1 , Djordjevic J. 1 , Jones-Gotman M. 1 1 Montreal Neurological Institute, McGill University,Montreal, Quebec, Canada; 2 Psychology, Uppsala University, Uppsala,SwedenWe recently demonstrated that secondary olfactory regions, contraryto primary regions, are preferentially activated during the processing ofbinary odor mixtures in comparison to single compounds. Particularly,the lateral orbitofrontal cortex (lOFC) appears to have a key role in thisprocess. Our current aim is to establish whether the lOFC is activatedproportionally to increasing impurity of odorants, defined as a deviationfrom pure odorant, in binary mixtures. Twelve subjects underwent PET,and the data from 5 scans of pyridine and citral mixtures, in varyingphysical proportions (from 10/90 to 90/10, with 50/50 being the mostimpure), were analyzed. We calculated the mean regional cerebralblood flow (rCBF) in 4 regions of interest (ROI) for all 5 conditions:left and right lOFC and left and right piriform cortex (PIR). For ROIs inthe lOFC, we predicted maximum rCBF in response to the 50/50mixture and minimum activation to the 10/90 and the 90/10 mixtures.For both ROIs in the PIR we expected no difference in rCBF acrossthese conditions. In both hemispheres, rCBF in the lOFC increased withodorant impurity, as indicated by an inversed U-shaped function. Therewas no significant difference in rCBF in the PIR across conditions. Theresults support the notion that activation in the lOFC increases inconjunction with odorant impurity in binary mixtures and add credenceto the vital role of the lateral orbitofrontal cortex in the processing ofbinary odor mixtures. Supported by grant MOP 57846 from theCanadian Institutes of Health Research awarded to MJG.100 Poster <strong>Chemosensory</strong> Coding and ClinicalBRAIN ACTIVATIONS TO CHEMICAL SIGNALSChen D. 1 , Zhou W. 1 , Hou P. 2 , Burton P. 1 1 Psychology, Rice University,Houston, TX; 2 Radiology, University of Texas Medical School atHouston, Houston, TXIt has been demonstrated in animals across every phylum thataffective and motivational states can be communicated throughchemical signals. Moreover, the mechanism and neural substratesinvolved in processing social and nonsocial chemical information canbe different. Humans have also been shown to distinguish amongchemical signals from different emotional states. Brain imaging studieson human responses to social chemosignals have been limited, primarilyusing Positron Emission Tomography and mostly focusing on brainactivations to one or two steroids. In this present study, we usefunctional magnetic resonance imaging to investigate the neural basis ofsocial chemosignals. We hypothesize that social chemosignlas willlikely activate common areas of the brain involved in processing socialinformation from other modalities. We use emotional as well as othertypes of social and nonsocial olfactory stimuli, and compare theactivations in the amygdala, hypothalamus, cingulate, insular, andprefrontal cortex, areas previously associated with processing socioemotionalinformation. Emotional chemosignals consisit of sweatcollected from donors while they were experiencing a particularemotion. All olfactory stimuli are delivered through a computercontrolledfMRI-compatible odor delivery device (olfactometer).Preliminary analysis suggests different neural substrates in processingsocial vs. nonsocial chemosignals. We are currently determiningwhether the pattern applies to a greater number of subjects. Supportedby NIH R03DC4956.25
- Page 1 and 2: 1 Symposium Chemosensory Receptors
- Page 3 and 4: 9 Symposium Chemosensory Receptors
- Page 5 and 6: 17 Givaudan LectureFISHING FOR NOVE
- Page 7 and 8: 25 Symposium Impact of Odorant Meta
- Page 10 and 11: 37 Poster Peripheral Olfaction and
- Page 12 and 13: 45 Poster Peripheral Olfaction and
- Page 14 and 15: 53 Poster Peripheral Olfaction and
- Page 16 and 17: 61 Poster Peripheral Olfaction and
- Page 18 and 19: 69 Poster Peripheral Olfaction and
- Page 20 and 21: 77 Poster Peripheral Olfaction and
- Page 22 and 23: 85 Poster Peripheral Olfaction and
- Page 26 and 27: 101 Poster Chemosensory Coding and
- Page 28 and 29: 109 Poster Chemosensory Coding and
- Page 30 and 31: 117 Poster Chemosensory Coding and
- Page 32 and 33: 125 Poster Chemosensory Coding and
- Page 34 and 35: 133 Poster Chemosensory Coding and
- Page 36 and 37: sniffing behavior. Furthermore, we
- Page 38 and 39: 149 Slide Chemosensory Coding and C
- Page 40 and 41: 157 Slide Taste ChemoreceptionHTAS2
- Page 42 and 43: 165 Poster Multimodal, Chemosensory
- Page 44 and 45: 173 Poster Multimodal, Chemosensory
- Page 46 and 47: 181 Poster Multimodal, Chemosensory
- Page 48 and 49: 189 Poster Multimodal, Chemosensory
- Page 50 and 51: 197 Poster Multimodal, Chemosensory
- Page 52 and 53: 205 Poster Multimodal, Chemosensory
- Page 54 and 55: 213 Poster Multimodal, Chemosensory
- Page 56 and 57: 221 Poster Multimodal, Chemosensory
- Page 58 and 59: 229 Slide Molecular Genetic Approac
- Page 60 and 61: 237 Poster Central Olfaction and Ch
- Page 62 and 63: 245 Poster Central Olfaction and Ch
- Page 64 and 65: 253 Poster Central Olfaction and Ch
- Page 66 and 67: 261 Poster Central Olfaction and Ch
- Page 68 and 69: 269 Poster Central Olfaction and Ch
- Page 70 and 71: 277 Poster Central Olfaction and Ch
- Page 72 and 73: 285 Poster Central Olfaction and Ch
- Page 74 and 75:
293 Poster Central Olfaction and Ch
- Page 76 and 77:
301 Slide Central OlfactionOLFACTOR
- Page 78 and 79:
309 Poster Chemosensory Molecular G
- Page 80 and 81:
317 Poster Chemosensory Molecular G
- Page 82 and 83:
325 Poster Chemosensory Molecular G
- Page 84 and 85:
333 Poster Chemosensory Molecular G
- Page 86 and 87:
341 Poster Chemosensory Molecular G
- Page 88 and 89:
349 Poster Chemosensory Molecular G
- Page 90 and 91:
357 Poster Chemosensory Molecular G
- Page 92 and 93:
365 Poster Chemosensory Molecular G
- Page 94 and 95:
373 Symposium Olfactory Bulb Comput
- Page 96 and 97:
381 Symposium Presidential: Why Hav
- Page 98 and 99:
389 Poster Central Taste and Chemos
- Page 100 and 101:
397 Poster Central Taste and Chemos
- Page 102 and 103:
405 Poster Central Taste and Chemos
- Page 104 and 105:
413 Poster Central Taste and Chemos
- Page 106 and 107:
421 Poster Central Taste and Chemos
- Page 108 and 109:
429 Poster Central Taste and Chemos
- Page 110 and 111:
437 Symposium Neural Dynamics and C
- Page 112 and 113:
445 Poster Developmental, Neurogene
- Page 114 and 115:
453 Poster Developmental, Neurogene
- Page 116 and 117:
461 Poster Developmental, Neurogene
- Page 118 and 119:
469 Poster Developmental, Neurogene
- Page 120 and 121:
477 Poster Developmental, Neurogene
- Page 122 and 123:
485 Poster Developmental, Neurogene
- Page 124 and 125:
493 Poster Developmental, Neurogene
- Page 126 and 127:
501 Poster Developmental, Neurogene
- Page 128 and 129:
Brody, Carlos, 438Brown, R. Lane, 3
- Page 130 and 131:
Gilbertson, Timothy Allan, 63, 64,
- Page 132 and 133:
Klouckova, Iveta, 150Klyuchnikova,
- Page 134 and 135:
Ni, Daofeng, 93Nichols, Zachary, 35
- Page 136 and 137:
Sorensen, Peter W., 23, 288, 289Sou
- Page 138:
Zeng, Musheng, 466Zeng, Shaoqun, 26