The impact of individual variations in taste sensitivity on coffee perceptions and preferences

Physiology and Behavior

Volumn 138, Issue , 2015, Pages 219-226

  Masi, Camilla ^a   Dinnella, Caterina ^a   Monteleone, Erminio ^a   Prescott, John ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FLORENCE   (Italy)

^b TasteMatters Research and Consulting   (Australia)

Author keywords

6 n propylthiouracil; Bitterness; Fungiform papillae; Sugar use

Indexed keywords

6 N PROPYLTHIOURACIL; CAFFEINE; PROPYLTHIOURACIL; QUININE; SUGAR; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; COFFEE; DIETARY SUCROSE; HYDROCHLORIC ACID;

ARTICLE; ASTRINGENCY; BITTER TASTE; COFFEE; FEMALE; FOOD INTAKE; FOOD PREFERENCE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; PILOT STUDY; SOUR TASTE; TASTE; TASTE ACUITY; ADMINISTRATION AND DOSAGE; ADULT; ANATOMY AND HISTOLOGY; CHEMISTRY; DIETARY SUCROSE; FOOD PREFERENCES; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOPHYSICS; TASTE PERCEPTION; TASTE THRESHOLD; TONGUE; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; CAFFEINE; COFFEE; DIETARY SUCROSE; FEMALE; FOOD PREFERENCES; HUMANS; HYDROCHLORIC ACID; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROPYLTHIOURACIL; PSYCHOPHYSICS; QUININE; TASTE PERCEPTION; TASTE THRESHOLD; TONGUE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84910106873     PISSN: 00319384     EISSN: 1873507X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2014.10.031     Document Type: Article

References (87)

1. Pangborn R.M. Individual variation in affective responses to taste stimuli. Psychon Sci 1970, 21(2):125-126.
2. Cardello A.V. The role of the human senses in food acceptance. Food choice, acceptance and consumption 1996, 1-82. Blackie Academic & Professional, London (UK). H.L. Meiselman, H.J.M. MacFie (Eds.).
3. Drewnowski A. Taste preferences and food intake. Annu Rev Nutr 1997, 17:237-253.
4. Duffy V.B., Bartoshuk L.M. Food acceptance and genetic variation in taste. J Am Diet Assoc 2000, 100(6):647-655.
5. Reed D.R., Tanaka T., McDaniel A.H. Diverse tastes: genetics of sweet and bitter perception. Physiol Behav 2006, 88(3):215-226.
6. Tuorila H. Sensory perception as a basis of food acceptance and consumption. Consumer-led food product development 2007, 34-65. Woodhead, Cambridge (UK). H.J.M. MacFie (Ed.).
7. Miller I.J., Reedy F.E. Variations in human taste bud density and taste intensity perception. Physiol Behav 1990, 47(6):1213-1219.
8. Smith D.V. Taste intensity as a function of area and concentration: differentiation between compounds. J Exp Psychol 1971, 87(2):163-171.
9. Stein N., Laing D.G., Hutchinson I. Topographical differences in sweetness sensitivity in the peripheral gustatory system of adults and children. Brain Res Dev Brain Res 1994, 82(1-2):286-292.
10. Bartoshuk L.M. Comparing sensory experiences across individuals: recent psychophysical advances illuminate genetic variation in taste perception. Chem Senses 2000, 25(4):447-460.
11. Delwiche J.F., Buletic Z., Breslin P.A. Relationship of papillae number to bitter intensity of quinine and PROP within and between individuals. Physiol Behav 2001, 74(3):329-337.
12. Hayes J.E., Bartoshuk L.M., Kidd J.R., Duffy V.B. Supertasting and PROP bitterness depends on more than the TAS2R38 gene. Chem Senses 2008, 33(3):255-265.
13. Bartoshuk L.M., Fast K., Karrer T.A., Marino S., Price R.A., Reed D.A. PROP supertasters and the perception of sweetness and bitterness. Chem Senses 1992, 17:594.
14. Bartoshuk L.M., Duffy V.B., Lucchina L.A., Prutkin J., Fast K. PROP (6-n-propylthiouracil) supertasters and the saltiness of NaCl. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1998, 855:793-796.
15. Lucchina L.A., Curtis V OF, Putnam P., Drewnowski A., Prutkin J.M., Bartoshuk Psychophysical measurement of 6-n-Propylthiouracil (PROP) taste perception. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1998, 855:816-819.
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 propylthiouracil bitterness perception. Curr Biol 2005, 15(4):322-327.
17. Bartoshuk L.M. The biological basis of food perception and acceptance. Food Qual Prefer 1993, 4(1-2):21-32.
18. Prescott J., Ripandelli N., Wakeling I. Binary taste mixture interactions in PROP non-tasters, medium-tasters and supertasters. Chem Senses 2001, 26:993-1003.
19. Hall M.J., Bartoshuk L.M., Cain W.S., Stevens J.C. PTC taste blindness and the taste of caffeine. Nature 1975, 253:442-443.
20. Leach E.J., Noble A.C. Comparison of bitterness of caffeine and quinine by a time-intensity procedure. Chem Senses 1986, 11:339-345.
21. Bartoshuk L.M., Rifkin B., Marks L.E. Bitterness of KCl and benzoate: related to genetic status for sensitivity to PTC/PROP. Chem Senses 1988, 13(4):517-528.
22. Mela D.J. Bitter taste intensity: the effect of tastant and thiourea taster status. Chem Senses 1989, 14:131-135.
23. Bartoshuk L.M. Bitter taste of saccharin, related to the genetic ability to taste the bitter substance 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP). Science 1979, 205:934-935.
24. Gent J.F., Bartoshuk L.M. Sweetness of sucrose, neohesperidin dihydrochalone, and saccharin is related to genetic ability to taste the bitter substance 6-n-propylthiouracil. Chem Senses 1983, 7:265-272.
25. Prutkin J., Fast K., Lucchina L.A., Snyder D.J., Bartoshuk L.M. Spatial taste testing and genetic taste variation. Chem Senses 1999, 24:604.
26. Karrer T., Bartoshuk L.M. Capsaicin desensitization and recovery on the human tongue. Physiol Behav 1991, 49(4):757-764.
27. Prescott J., Swain-Campbell N. Responses to repeated oral irritation by capsaicin, cinnamaldehyde and ethanol in PROP tasters and non-tasters. Chem Senses 2000, 25:239-246.
28. Bartoshuk L.M., Conner E., Brubin D., Karrer T., Kochenbach K., Palcso M., et al. PROP supertasters and the perception of ethyl alcohol. Chem Senses 1993, 18:526-527.
29. Duffy V.B., Davidson A.C., Kidd J.R., Kidd K.K., Speed W.C., Pakstis A.J., et al. Bitter receptor gene (TAS2R38), 6-n propylthiouracil (PROP) bitterness and alcohol intake. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 2004, 28:1629-1637.
30. Pickering G.J., Simunkova K., DiBattista D. Intensity of taste and astringency sensations elicited by red wines is associated with sensitivity to PROP (6-n-propylthiouracil). Food Qual Prefer 2004, 15:147-154.
31. Pickering G.J., Robert G. Perception of mouthfeel sensations elicited by red wine are associated with sensitivity to 6-n-propylthiouracil. J Sens Stud 2006, 21:249-265.
32. Bajec M.R., Pickering G.J. Astringency: mechanisms and perception. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 2008, 48(9):858-875.
33. Kim U.K., Jorgenson E., Coon H., Leppert M., Risch N., Drayna D. Positional cloning of the human quantitative trait locus underlying taste sensitivity to phenylthiocarbamide. Science 2003, 299(5610):1221-1225.
34. Mennella J.A., Pepino M.Y., Reed D.R. Genetic and environmental determinants of bitter perception and sweet preferences. Pediatrics 2005, 115(2):e216-e222.
35. Steiner J.E. Human facial expressions in response to taste and smell stimulation. Adv Child Dev Behav 1979, 13:257-295.
36. Drewnowski A., Gomez-Carneros Bitter taste, phytonutrients, and the consumer: a review. Am J Clin Nutr 2000, 72:1424-1435.
37. Steiner J.E., Glaser D., Hawilo M.E., Berridge K.C. Comparative expression of hedonic impact: Affective reactions to taste by human infants and other primates. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2001, 25:53-74.
38. Hofmann T. Identification of the key bitter compounds in our daily diet is a prerequisite for the understanding of the hTAS2R gene polymorphisms affecting food choice. 15th International Symposium on Olfaction and Taste Book Series 2009, 1170:116-125.
39. 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. Physiol Behav 2006, 87:304-313.
40. Drewnowski A., Henderson S.A., Levine A., Hann C. Taste and food preferences as predictors of dietary practices in young women. Public Health Nutr 1999, 2:513-519.
41. Kaminski L.C., Henderson S.C., Drewnowski A. Young women's food preferences and taste responsiveness to 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP). Physiol Behav 2000, 68:691-698.
42. Turnbull B., Matisoo-Smith E. Taste sensitivity to 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP) predicts acceptance of bitter-tasting spinach in 3-6 year old children. Am J Clin Nutr 2002, 76:1101-1105.
43. Glanville E.V., Kaplan A.R. Food preference and sensitivity of taste for bitter compounds. Nature 1965, 205:851-853.
44. Drewnowski A., Henderson S.A., Shore A.B. Taste responses to naringin, a flavonoid, and the acceptance of grapefruit juice are related to genetic sensitivity to 6-n-propylthiouracil. Am J Clin Nutr 1997, 66:391-397.
45. Duffy V.B., Peterson J.M., Bartoshuk L.M. Associations between taste genetics, oral sensation and alcohol intake. Physiol Behav 2004, 82(2-3):435-445.
46. Hayes J.E., Duffy V.B. Oral sensory phenotype identifies level of sugar and fat required for maximal liking. Physiol Behav 2008, 95:77-87.
47. Bakke A., Vickers Z. Effects of bitterness, roughness, PROP taster status, and fungiform papillae density on bread acceptance. Food Qual Prefer 2011, 22:317-325.
48. Tinley E.M., Yeomans M.R., Durlach P.J. Caffeine reinforces flavour preference in caffeine-dependent, but not long-term withdrawn, caffeine consumers. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2003, 166(4):416-423.
49. Yeomans M.R., Mobini S., Elliman T.D., Walker H.C., Stevenson R.J. Hedonic and sensory characteristics of odors conditioned by pairing with tastants in humans. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 2006, 32(3):215-228.
50. Yeomans M.R., Tepper B.J., Rietzschel J., Prescott J. Human hedonic responses to sweetness: Role of taste genetics and anatomy. Physiol Behav 2007, 91:264-273.
51. Yeomans M.R., Prescott J., Gould N.J. Acquired hedonic and sensory characteristics of odours: Influence of sweet liker and propylthiouracil taster status. Q J Exp Psychol 2009, 62(8):1648-1664.
52. Martens H., Martens M. Multivariate analysis of quality: an introduction 2001, John Wiley & Sons Ltd Ed., New York.
53. Illy A., Viani R. Espresso coffee: the science of quality 2005, Elsevier Academic Press, London. 2nd ed. A. Illy, R. Viani (Eds.).
54. Clarke R.J. Coffee: roast and ground. Encyclopedia of food science and nutrition 2003, 1487-1493. Academic Press, Oxford. B. Caballero, L.C. Trugo, P.M. Finglas (Eds.).
55. Baggenstoss J., Poisson L., Kaegi R., Perren R., Escher F. Coffee roasting and aroma formation: application of different time-temperature conditions. J Agric Food Chem 2008, 56(14):5836-5846.
56. Bartoshuk L.M., Duffy V.B., Fast K., Green B.G., Prutkin J., Snyder D.J. Labeled scales (e.g., category, Likert, VAS) and invalid across-group comparisons: what we have learned from genetic variation in taste. Food Qual Prefer 2002, 14:125-138.
57. Prescott J., Soo J., Campbell H., Roberts C. Responses of PROP taster groups to variations in sensory qualities within foods and beverages. Physiol Behav 2004, 82(2-3):459-469.
58. Hayes J.E., Duffy V.B. Revisiting sugar-fat mixtures: sweetness and creaminess vary with phenotypic markers of oral sensation. Chem Senses 2007, 32:225-236.
59. Peryam D.R., Pilgrim F.J. Hedonic scale method of measuring food preferences. Food Technol 1957, 11:9-14.
60. Green B.G., Shaffer G.S., Gilmore M.M. Derivation and evaluation of a semantic scale of oral sensation magnitude with apparent ratio properties. Chem Senses 1993, 18:683-702.
61. Drewnowski 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. Am J Diet Assoc 2000, 100:191-197.
62. Yeomans M.R. Psychobiological mechanisms in food choice. Consumer-led food product development 2007, 81-107. Woodhead, Cambridge (UK). H.J.M. MacFie (Ed.).
63. Looy H., Weingarten H.P. Effects of metabolic state on sweet taste reactivity in humans depend on underlying metabolic response profile. Chem Senses 1991, 16:123-130.
64. Looy H., Weingarten H.P. Facial expressions and genetic sensitivity to 6-n-propylthiouracil predict hedonic response to sweet. Physiol Behav 1992, 52(1):75-82.
65. Bartoshuk L.M., Duffy V.B., Miller I. PTC/PROP tasting: anatomy, psychophysics and sex effects. Physiol Behav 1994, 56:1165-1171.
66. Miller I.J. Variation in human taste bud density as a function of age. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1989, 561:307-319.
67. Reedy F.E., Bartoshuk L.M., Miller I.J., Duffy V.B., Lucchina L., Yanagisawa K. Relationships among papillae, taste pores, and 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP) suprathreshold taste sensitivity. Chem Senses 1993, 18:618-619.
68. Duffy V.B., Miller I.J., Bartoshuk L.M. 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP) supertasters and women have greater numbers of fungiform papillae taste buds. Chem Senses 1994, 19:465.
69. Hosaka-Haito Y., Lucchina L.A., Snyder D.J., Boggiano M.K., Duffy V.B., Bartoshuk L.M. Number of fungiform papillae in nontasters, medium tasters and supertasters of PROP (6-n-propylthiouracil). Chem Senses 1996, 21:616.
70. Tepper B.J., Nurse R.J. Fat perception is related to PROP taster status. Physiol Behav 1997, 61:949-954.
71. Prutkin J., Fisher E.M., Etter L., Fast K., Gardener E., Lucchina L.A., et al. Genetic variation and inferences about perceived taste intensity in mice and men. Physiol Behav 2000, 69:161-173.
72. Essick G.K., Chopra A., Guest S., McGlone F. Lingual tactile acuity, taste perception, and the density and diameter of fungiform papillae in female subjects. Physiol Behav 2003, 80:289-302.
73. Nachtsheim R., Schlich E. The influence of 6-n-propylthiouracil bitterness, fungiform papilla count and saliva flow on the perception of pressure and fat. Food Qual Prefer 2013, 29:137-145.
74. Frank O., Zehentbauer G., Hofmann T. Bioresponse-guided decomposition of roast coffee beverage and identification of key bitter taste compounds. Eur Food Res Technol 2006, 222(5-6):492-508.
75. Frank O., Blumberg S., Kunert C., Zehentbauer G., Hofmann T. Structure determination and sensory analysis of bitter-tasting 4-vinylcatechol oligomers and their identification in roasted coffee by means of LC-MS/MS. J Agric Food Chem 2007, 55(5):1945-1954.
76. Booth D.A., Sharpe O., Conner M.T. Gustatory discriminative norms for caffeine in normal use point to supertasters, tasters and non-tasters. Chem Percept 2011, 4:154-162.
77. Drewnowski A. The science and complexity of bitter taste. Nutr Rev 2001, 59(6):163-169.
78. Gregson R.A., Baker A.F. Sourness and bitterness: confusions over sequences of taste judgments. Br J Psychol 1973, 64(1):71-76.
79. Robinson J.O. The misure of taste names by untrained observers. Br J Psychol 1970, 61(3):375-378.
80. Breslin P.A.S., Gilmore M.M., Beauchamp G.K., Green B.G. Psychophysical evidence that oral astringency is a tactile sensation. Chem Senses 1993, 18(4):405-417.
81. Dinnella C., Recchia A., Fia G., Bertuccioli M., Monteleone E. Saliva characteristics and individual sensitivity to phenolic astringent stimuli. Chem Senses 2009, 34(4):295-304.
82. McBurney D.H. Effects of adaptation on human taste function. Olfaction and taste III 1969, 407-419. Pergamon Press, New York. C. Pfaffmann (Ed.).
83. Lawless H. Evidence for neural inhibition in bittersweet taste mixtures. J Comp Physiol Psychol 1979, 93:S38-S47.
84. Delwiche J.F., Buletic Z., Breslin P.A.S. Covariation in individuals' sensitivities to bitter compounds: Evidence supporting multiple mechanisms. Percept Psychophys 2001, 63(5):761-776.
85. Keast R.S., Breslin P.A.S. Modifying the bitterness of selected oral pharmaceuticals with cation and anion series of salts. Pharm Res 2002, 19(7):1019-1026.
86. Keast R., Roper J. A complex relationship among chemical concentration, detection threshold, and suprathreshold intensity of bitter compounds. Chem Senses 2007, 32(3):245-253.
87. Zuniga J.R., David S.H., Englehardt R.A., Miller I.J., Schiffman S.S., Phillips C. Taste performance on the anterior human tongue varies with fungiform taste bud density. Chem Senses 1993, 18:449-460.