1 1 Symposium Chemosensory Receptors Satellite DEVELOPMENT ...

329 Poster Chemosensory Molecular Genetics andVNO/PheromonePROBING FUNCTIONALITY OF THE HUMAN VNOWyart C.J. 1 , Webster W. 2 , McClary A. 3 , Sobel N. 3 1 Psychology,University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA; 2 Kaiser Medical,Berkeley, CA; 3 Neuroscience, University of California, Berkeley,berkeley, CAMammalian pheromones influence behavior and/or hormonal state inconspecifics, often through the vomeronasal organ (VNO). Humanputative pheromones have been identified, but whether human adultshave a functional VNO remains controversial. Here we test whether theputative human VNO mediates the effects of smelling the putativepheromone 4,16-androstadien-3-one (AND). Smelling AND influencesautonomic nervous system activity, endocrine state, and mood inwomen. We set out to quantify these effects, and then ask whether wecould negate them by physically and chemically blocking the putativeVNO (VNOblock). 30 women are scheduled for three 2.5-hour-longsessions separated by 28 days. In a double-blind study, VNOblock wasapplied selectively before exposure to either AND or CONTROL.Session order was counter balanced, and AND/CONTROL werematched for intensity/pleasantness. This design allowed us to assess thedifferential impact of VNOblock on the physiological, endocrine, andpsychological response to AND and CONTROL. To date, 31 womenhave completed the first day of study, 12 have completed 2 days. Alimited pilot analysis of 7 subjects who were counterbalanced for daysONE and TWO suggests a greater physiological response to AND thanCONTROL (F(1,69) = 10.3, p < 0.002), but no interaction withVNOblock (F(1,69) = .8, p = 0.36). Although this points againstfunctionality of the human VNO, the power of this comparison isminimal (n = 7). By Achems meeting time, all participants will havecompleted all days, and we expect to be able to determine whetherblocking the putative human VNO influences the response to putativehuman pheromones.330 Poster Chemosensory Molecular Genetics andVNO/PheromoneFUNCTIONAL NEURONAL PROCESSING OF BODY ODORSDIFFERS FROM THAT OF COMMON ODORSLundstrom J.N. 1 , Boyle J.A. 1 , Zatorre R.J. 1 , Jones-Gotman M. 11 Montreal Neurological Institute, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec,CanadaOur ability to identify related individuals based solely on their bodyodor is remarkably high also in the absence of conscious awareness ofour performance. By means of positron emission tomography (PET), wesought to elucidate the neuronal substrate behind body odor perceptionto answer the question of whether central processing of body odorsdiffers from that of common, non-body odors. To date, six participants,of a total of twelve, were scanned while smelling either body odors, amixture of perceptually similar common odors, or clean air. Initialanalyses indicate that smelling the mixture of common odors activatedregions commonly associated with olfactory processing such as thepiriform cortex and the orbitofrontal cortex. In contrast, body odorsuniquely activated areas seldom seen in olfactory processing such assuperior frontal cortex, superior temporal cortex, and occipital corticalareas. Taken together, these preliminary results suggest that body odorsare processed differently from common odors, with a largerinvolvement of multimodal processing mechanisms.331 Poster Chemosensory Molecular Genetics andVNO/PheromoneDIFFERENT CEREBRAL ACTIVATION PRODUCED BY APUTATIVE SOCIAL CHEMOSIGNAL AND PERCEPTUALLYSIMILAR ODORANTSGerber J.C. 1 , Bensafi M. 2 , Husner A. 3 , Frasnelli J. 4 , Reden J. 4 , HummelT. 4 1 University of Dresden, Dresden, Germany; 2 Neuroscience,University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA; 3 ENT Department,University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland; 4 ENT, University of Dresden,Dresden, GermanyAim of this study was to compare cerebral activation produced by aputative social chemosignal and perceptually similar odorants, namelyandrostadienone, androstenone, and butanol. A computer-controlledolfactometer was used for stimulus presentation (OM6b, BurghartInstruments, Germany); 12 healthy female volunteers (mean age 24years; 20 to 30 years) participated. The three odors were rated asequally intense, and received similar hedonic ratings (n.s.). Subjectswere right-handed, normosmic and had no nasal pathology. They wereexamined in a 1.5 Tesla MRI scanner (Siemens, Germany). Stimuliwere presented in blocks (30 s odorless air, 30 s odorant; 1 s stimulusduration, 3 s ISI, randomized). Preliminary investigations showeddifferences in cortical representation, pointing to a higher involvementof limbic structures (cingulate cortex, amygdala) and orbitofronal cortexfor androstadienone. The data suggest that a putative social chemosignalproduces different patterns of activation compared to “normal” odors .332 Poster Chemosensory Molecular Genetics andVNO/PheromoneCULTURE, OLFACTION AND COGNITION:MULTIDIMENSIONALITY OF 'CULTURALLY SCENTEDKNOWLEDGE'Damhuis C. 1 1 Monell Chemical Senses Center, Philadelphia, PAOlfactory experiences and odor meanings are multidimensional: Theyare individual and simultaneously impacted by collectiverepresentations (cultural norm). The dimension of the individualperceiver is influenced by evolutionary and environmental factors,stimulus property, and odorant/receptor interactions as well as by avariety of upstream processes, e.g. psychophysical, psychogenetic andcognitive mechanisms. These top-down and bottom-up dimensionsinteract simultaneously when it comes to experiencing and `makingscents of´ odor. One of the major debates concerning the currentscientific discourse revolves around the origin of odor hedonics. Whilesome odor meanings may be derived from our evolutionary legacy, themajority is learned in the pre-natal stage as well as afterwards,suggesting THAT our socio-cultural milieu is impacting in the process.The simultaneity of the processes of odor learning and the acquisition ofcultural knowledge is suggested by (1) the location in the CNS whereboth odor meaning and rational information is processed, namely theleft frontal cortex, (2) the diversity of odor schemata employed andgenerated across space and time as to what odor is deemed sociallyacceptable or unacceptable, and (3) observations about how individualsmanipulate olfactory experiences, that is, how humans negotiate theboundaries between nature and culture and between the individual andthe collective. An investigation of the interactions between thesedimensions furthers our understanding as to what odor indeed `means´.By introducing the cultural dimension to our current cognitive paradigmthis presentation proposes a synthesized model of what is involvedwhen generating `culturally scented knowledge´.83