Suppr超能文献

未接触过相关刺激的评估者对化学感觉刺激的感知映射。

Perceptual mapping of chemesthetic stimuli in naïve assessors.

作者信息

Byrnes Nadia, Nestrud Michael A, Hayes John E

机构信息

Sensory Evaluation Center, College of Agricultural Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA ; Department of Food Science, College of Agricultural Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA.

Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc., Lakeville, Massachusetts, USA.

出版信息

Chemosens Percept. 2015 Jun 1;8(1):19-32. doi: 10.1007/s12078-015-9178-7.

Abstract

Chemesthetic compounds, responsible for sensations such as burning, cooling, and astringency, are difficult stimuli to work with, especially when the evaluation task requires retasting. Here, we developed a protocol by which chemesthetic compounds can be assessed using sorting. We compared the performance of two cohorts of untrained assessors on this task, one with nose clips and the other without. Similarity matrices were analyzed using multidimensional scaling (MDS) to produce perceptual maps for the two cohorts. Overall, the groupings from the nose open cohort tended to follow a biological basis, consistent with previous findings that suggest compounds that activate a common receptor will elicit similar sensations. The nose-open and nose-pinched cohorts generated significantly different maps. The nose-pinched cohort had a higher variance in the MDS solution than the nose-open group. While the nose-open cohort generated seven clusters, the nose-pinched cohort generated only two clusters, seemingly based on the ready identification of chemesthetic sensations or not. There was less consensus regarding the attributes used to describe the samples in the nose-pinched cohort than in the nose-open cohort as well, as this cohort collectively generated more attributes but fewer were significant in regression.

摘要

引起灼烧、清凉和收敛等感觉的化学感觉化合物是难以处理的刺激物,尤其是当评估任务需要再次品尝时。在这里,我们开发了一种方案,通过分类来评估化学感觉化合物。我们比较了两组未经训练的评估员在这项任务上的表现,一组使用鼻夹,另一组不使用。使用多维尺度分析(MDS)对相似性矩阵进行分析,以生成两组的感知图。总体而言,不戴鼻夹组的分组倾向于遵循生物学基础,这与之前的研究结果一致,即激活共同受体的化合物会引发相似的感觉。不戴鼻夹组和戴鼻夹组生成的图有显著差异。戴鼻夹组在MDS解决方案中的方差比不戴鼻夹组更高。不戴鼻夹组产生了七个簇,而戴鼻夹组只产生了两个簇,这似乎取决于是否能轻易识别化学感觉。与不戴鼻夹组相比,戴鼻夹组在描述样品时使用的属性也缺乏一致性,因为该组总体上产生了更多属性,但在回归分析中显著的属性较少。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验