Skip Navigation


Chemical Senses Advance Access originally published online on November 23, 2005
Chemical Senses 2006 31(1):9-26; doi:10.1093/chemse/bjj001
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
31/1/9    most recent
bjj001v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Clevenger, A. C.
Right arrow Articles by Restrepo, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Clevenger, A. C.
Right arrow Articles by Restrepo, D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Evaluation of the Validity of a Maximum Likelihood Adaptive Staircase Procedure for Measurement of Olfactory Detection Threshold in Mice

Amy C. Clevenger and Diego Restrepo

Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, Neuroscience Program, and Rocky Mountain Taste and Smell Center, University of Colorado School of Medicine, University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences Center at Fitzsimons, Mail Stop 8108, PO Box 6511, Aurora, CO 80045, USA

Correspondence to be sent to: Amy C. Clevenger, Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, Neuroscience Program, and Rocky Mountain Taste and Smell Center, University of Colorado School of Medicine, University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences Center at Fitzsimons, Mail Stop 8108, PO Box 6511, Aurora, CO 80045, USA. e-mail: amy.clevenger{at}uchsc.edu

Threshold is defined as the stimulus intensity necessary for a subject to reach a specified percent correct on a detection test. MLPEST (maximum likelihood parameter estimation by sequential testing) is a method that is able to determine threshold accurately and more rapidly than many other methods. Originally developed for human auditory and visual tasks, it has been adapted for human olfactory and gustatory tests. In order to utilize this technique for olfactory testing in mice, we have adapted MLPEST methodology for use with computerized olfactometry as a tool to estimate odor detection thresholds. Here we present Monte Carlo simulations and operant conditioning data that demonstrate the potential utility of this technique in mice, we explore the ramifications of altering MLPEST test parameters on performance, and we discuss the advantages and disadvantages of using MLPEST compared to other methods for the estimation of thresholds in rodents. Using MLPEST, we find that olfactory detection thresholds in mice deficient for the cyclic nucleotide–gated channel subunit A2 are similar to those of wild-type animals for odorants the knockout animals are able to detect.

Key words: CNGA2, knockout mice, maximum likelihood, odor detection, olfactometer, operant conditioning


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 ScienceHome page
J. Hu, C. Zhong, C. Ding, Q. Chi, A. Walz, P. Mombaerts, H. Matsunami, and M. Luo
Detection of Near-Atmospheric Concentrations of CO2 by an Olfactory Subsystem in the Mouse
Science, August 17, 2007; 317(5840): 953 - 957.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.