Relationship between food preferences and PROP taster status of college students

Appetite

Volumn 68, Issue , 2013, Pages 124-131

  Catanzaro, Diane ^a   Chesbro, Emily C ^a   Velkey, Andrew J ^a  

^a Department of Psychology ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

Bitterness; Culture; Food preferences; Propylthiouracil (PROP); Supertaster; Taste

Indexed keywords

PROPYLTHIOURACIL;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BEER; BEVERAGE; BROCCOLI; CABBAGE; CACAO; COFFEE; COLLEGE STUDENT; FEEDING BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; FOOD PREFERENCE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PEPPER; QUESTIONNAIRE; RED WINE; SPINACH; SWEET PEPPER; TASTE; TASTE PREFERENCE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; CULTURE; FEMALE; FOOD PREFERENCES; HUMANS; MALE; PROPYLTHIOURACIL; QUESTIONNAIRES; SOUTHWESTERN UNITED STATES; STUDENTS; TASTE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84878592375     PISSN: 01956663     EISSN: 10958304     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2013.04.025     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Anliker J.E., Bartoshuk L., Ferris A.M., Hooks L.D. Children's food preferences and genetic sensitivity to the bitter taste of 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP). American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 1991, 54:16-20.
2. Bandura A. Social learning theory 1977, General Learning Press, New York.
3. Bartoshuk L. Bitter taste of saccharin. Related to the genetic ability to taste 6-n-propylthiouracil. Science 1979, 205:934-935.
4. Bartoshuk L.M. Sweetness. History, preference, and genetic variability. Food Technology 1991, 45(11). 108, 110, 112-113.
5. Bartoshuk L.M. Comparing sensory experiences across individuals. Recent psychophysical advances illuminate genetic variation in taste perception. Chemical Senses 2000, 25(4):447-460. 10.1093/chemse/25,4,447.
6. Bartoshuk L.M., Duffy V.B., Green B.G., Hoffman H.J., Ko C.W., Luccina L.A., et al. Valid across-group comparisons with labeled scales. The gLMS versus magnitude matching. Physiology and Behavior 2004, 82:109-114.
7. Bartoshuk L.M., Duffy V.B., Miller I.J. PTC/PROP tasting. Anatomy, psychophysics, and sex effects. Physiology & Behavior 1994, 56(6):1165-1171.
8. Bartoshuk L.M., Fast K., Snyder D.J. Genetic differences in human taste perception. Genetic variation in taste sensitivity 2004, 32. Dekker, NY. J. Prescott, B.J. Tepper (Eds.).
9. Bartoshuk L.M., Hooper J.E., Marks L.E., Rifkin B. Bitterness of KCl and benzoate; related to genetic status for sensitivity to PTC/PROP. Chemical Senses 1988, 13:517-528.
10. Beauchamp G.K., Mennella J.A. Flavor perception in human infants. Developmental and functional significance. Digestion 2011, 83:1-6.
11. Bell K.I., Tepper B.J. Short-term vegetable intake by young children classified by 6-n-propylthoiuracil bitter-taste phenotype. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2006, 84:245-251.
12. Birch L.L. Development of food preferences. Annual Review of Nutrition 1999, 19:41-62.
13. Birch L., Zimmerman S., Hind H. The influence of social-affective context on the formation of children s food preferences. Child Development 1980, 51:856-861.
14. Blakeslee A.F., Fox A.L. Our different taste worlds. Journal of Heredity 1932, 23:97-107.
15. Bradbury J. Taste perception. Cracking the code. PLoS Biology 2004, 2:295-297. 10.1371/journal.pbio.0020064.
16. Bufe B., Breslin P.A.S., Kuhn C., Reed D.R., Tharp C.D., Slack J.P., et al. The molecular basis of individual differences in phenylthiocarbamide and proylthiouracil bitterness perception. Current Biology 2005, 15:322-327. http://dx.doi.org/10.10161/jcub.2005.01.047.
17. Desor J.A., Maller O., Andrews K. Ingestive responses of human newborns to salty, sour, and bitter stimuli. Journal of Comparative Physiological Psychology 1975, 89(8):966-970.
18. Dinehart M.E., Hayes J.E., Bartoshuk L.M., Lanier S.L., Duffy V.B. Bitter taste markers explain variability in vegetable sweetness, bitterness, and intake. Physiology & Behavior 2006, 87(2):304-313.
19. Drewnoski A., Henderson S.A., Hann C.S., Berg W.A., Ruffin M.T. Genetic taste markers and preferences for vegetables and fruit of female breast care patients. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 2000, 100:191-197.
20. Drewnowki A., Henderson S.A., Shore A.B. Genetic sensitivity to 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP) and hedonic responses to bitter and sweet tastes. Chemical Senses 1997, 22:27-37.
21. Drewnowski A. Taste preference and food intake. Annual Review of Nutrition 1997, 17:237-253.
22. Drewnowski A., Henderson S.A., Barratt-Fornell A. Genetic sensitivity to 6-n-propylthiouracil and sensory responses to sugar and fat mixtures. Physiology & Behavior 1998, 63:771-777.
23. Drewnowski A., Henderson S.A., Levine A., Hann C. Taste and food preferences and predictors of dietary practices in young women. Public Health Nutrition 1999, 2:513-519.
24. Duffy V.B., Bartoshuk L.M. Food acceptance and genetic variation in taste. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 2000, 100:647-655.
25. Duffy V.B., Bartoshuk L.M., Lucchina L.A., Snyder D.J., Tym A. Supertasters of PROP rate the highest creaminess to high-fat milk products. Chemical Senses 1996, 21:598.
26. Duffy V.B., Hayes J.E., Anderson A.C., Kidd J.R., Kidd K.K., Bartoshuk L.M. Vegetable intake in college-aged adults is explained by oral sensory phenotypes and TAS2R38 genotype. Chemosensory Perception 2010, 3(3-4):137-148. 10.1007/s12078-101-9079.
27. Feeney E. The impact of bitter perception and genotypic variation of TAS2R38 on food choice. Nutrition Bulletin 2010, 36:20-33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-3010.2010.01870.x.
28. Glanville E.V., Kaplan A.R. Food preference and sensitivity of taste for bitter compounds. Nature 1965, 205:851-853.
29. Glanz K., Basi M., Maibach E., Goldberg J., Snyder D. Why Americans eat what they do. Taste, nutrition, cost, convenience, and weight control as influences on food consumption. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 1998, 98:1118-1126.
30. Green B.G., Shaffer G.S., Gilmore M.M. Derivation and evaluation of a semantic scale of oral sensation magnitude with apparent ratio properties. Chemical Senses 1993, 14:683-702.
31. Hayes J.E., Bartoshuk L.M., Kidd J.R., Duffy V.B. Supertasting and PROP bitterness depends on more than the TAS2R38 gene. Chemical Senses 2008, 33(3):255-265. 10.1093/chemse/bjm084. PMID 18209019.
32. Intranuovo L.R., Powers A.S. The perceived bitterness of beer and 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP) taste sensitivity. Annuals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1998, 855:813-815.
33. Kaminski L.C., Henderson S.A., Drewnowski A. Young women's food preferences and taste responsiveness to 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP). Physiology and Behavior 2000, 68:691-697.
34. Karrer T., Bartoshuk L. Capsacian desensitization and recovery on the human tongue. Physiology and Behavior 1991, 49:757-764.
35. Keller K.L., Tepper B.J. Inherited taste sensitivity to 6-n-propylthiouracil and diet and body weight in children. Obesity 2004, 12:904-912. 10.1038/oby.2004.110.
36. Kim U.K., Drayna D. Genetics of individual differences in bitter taste perception. Lessons from the PTC gene. Clinical Genetics 2005, 67(4):275-280. 10.1111/j.1399-0004.2004.00361.x.
37. Lim J., Urban L., Green B.G. Measures of individual differences in taste and creaminess perceptions. Chemical Senses 2008, 33:493-501. 10.1093/chemse/bjn016.
38. Ludy M.J., Mattes R.D. Comparison of sensory, physiological, personality, and cultural attributes in regular spicy food users and non-users. Appetite 2012, 58(1):19-27. 10.1016/j.appet.2011.09.018.
39. Ly A., Drewnowski A. PROP (6-n-propylthiouracil) tasting and sensory responses to caffeine, sucrose, neohesperidin dihydrochalcone and chocolate. Chemical Senses 2001, 26(1):41-47.
40. Mattes R.D., Labov J. Bitter taste responses to phenylthiocarbamide are not related to dietary goitrogen intake in human beings. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 1989, 89:692-694.
41. Mattes R.D. 6-n-Propylthiouracil taster status, dietary modifier, marker, or misleader?. Genetic variation in taste sensitivity 2004, 245. Dekker, NY. J. Prescott, B.J. Tepper (Eds.).
42. Mennella J.A., Jagnow C.P., Beauchamp G.K. Prenatal and postnatal flavor learning by human infants. Pediatrics 2001, 107(6):88-93. http://dx.doi.org/10.152/peds.107.6.e88.
43. Mennella J.A., Lukasewycz L.D., Castor S.M., Beauchamp G.K. The timing and duration of a sensitive period in human flavor learning. A randomized trial. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2011, 93:1019-1024. 10.3945/ajcn.110.003541.
44. Mennella J.A., Pepino M.Y., Reed D.R. Genetic and environmental determinants of bitter perception and sweet preferences. Pediatrics 2005, 115:e216-e222. 10.1542/peds.2004-1582.
45. Miller I.J., Reedy F.E. Variation in human taste bud density and taste intensity perception. Physiology & Behavior 1990, 47:1213-1219.
46. Niewind A., Krondl M., Shrott M. Genetic influences on the selection of Brassica vegetables by elderly individuals. Nutrition Research 1988, 8:13-20.
47. Pasquet P., Oberti B., El Ati J., Hladik C.M. Relationships between threshold-based PROP sensitivity and food preferences of Tunisians. Appetite 2002, 39:167-173.
48. Pickering G.J., Robert G. Perception of mouthfeel sensations elicited by red wine are associated with sensitivity to 6-n-propylthiouracil. Journal of Sensory Studies 2006, 21:249-265.
49. Reed D.R. Birth of a new breed of supertaster. Chemical Senses 2008, 33:489-491.
50. Sandell M.A., Breslin P. Variability in taste receptor gene determines whether we taste toxins in food. Current Biology 2006, 16(18):R792-R794. 10.1016/j.cub.2006.08.049.
51. Smith D.V., Margolskee R.F. Making sense of taste. Scientific American 2001, 284(3):85-92.
52. Snyder D.J., Lucchina L.A., Duffy V.B., Bartoshuk L.M. Magnitude matching adds power to the labeled magnitude scale. Chemical Senses 1996, 21:673.
53. Stuckey B. Taste what you're missing. The passionate eater's guide to why food tastes good 2012, Free Press, NY.
54. Tepper B.J. Nutritional implications of genetic taste variation. The role of PROP sensitivity and other taste phenotypes. Annual Review of Nutrition 2008, 28:367-388.
55. Tepper B.J., Nurse R. Fat perception is related to PROP taster status. Physiological Behavior 1997, 61:949-954.
56. Tepper B.J., Nurse R. PROP taster status is related to fat perception and preference. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1998, 855:802-804.
57. Tepper B.J., White E.A., Koelliker Y., Lanzaro C., d'Adamo P., Gasparini P. Genetic variation in taste sensitivity to 6-n-proylthiouracil and its relationship to taste perception and food selection. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 2009, 1170:126-139.
58. Ullrich N.V., Touger-Decker R., O'Sullivan-Maillet J., Tepper B.J. PROP taster status and self-perceived food adventurousness influence food preferences. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 2004, 104:543-549.
59. Yackinous C.A., Guinard J.-X. Relation between PROP taster status and fat perception, touch and olfaction. Physiology & Behavior 2002, 72:427-437.
60. Yackinous C.A., Guinard J.-X. Relation between PROP (6-n-propylthiouracil) taster status, taste anatomy and dietary intake measures for young men and women. Appetite 2002, 38(3):201-209.
61. Zajonc R.B. Mere exposure. A gateway to the subliminal. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2001, 10(6):224-228.