Chemical Senses Advance Access published online on March 9, 2006
Chemical Senses, doi:10.1093/chemse/bjj044
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1 Genetic Epidemiology Group, Queensland Institute of Medical Research, Brisbane, Australia; School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. The perceived bitterness intensity for bitter solutions of propylthiouracil (PROP), sucrose octa-acetate (SOA), quinine HCl and caffeine were examined in a genetically informative sample of 392 females and 313 males (mean age of 17.8 ± 3.1 years), including 62 monozygotic and 131 dizygotic twin pairs and 237 sib pairs. Broad-sense heritabilities were estimated at 0.72, 0.28, 0.34, and 0.30 for PROP, SOA, quinine, and caffeine, respectively, for perceived intensity measures. Modeling showed 1) a group factor which explained a large amount of the genetic variation in SOA, quinine, and caffeine (22-28% phenotypic variation), 2) a factor responsible for all the genetic variation in PROP (72% phenotypic variation), which only accounted for 1% and 2% of the phenotypic variation in SOA and caffeine, respectively, and 3) a modest specific genetic factor for quinine (12% phenotypic variation). Unique environmental influences for all four compounds were due to a single factor responsible for 7-22% of phenotypic variation. The results suggest that the perception of PROP and the perception of SOA, quinine, and caffeine are influenced by two distinct sets of genes.
Accepted February 13, 2006
Article
Heritability and Genetic Covariation of Sensitivity to PROP, SOA, Quinine HCl, and Caffeine
Jonathan L. Hansen 1 *,
Danielle R. Reed 2,
Margaret J. Wright 3,
Nicholas G. Martin 3,
and
Paul A. S. Breslin 2
2 Monell Chemical Senses Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
3 Genetic Epidemiology Group, Queensland Institute of Medical Research, Brisbane, Australia
Jonathan L. Hansen, E-mail: Jonathan.Hansen{at}qimr.edu.au
![]()
Abstract ![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
K. Keskitalo, H. Tuorila, T. D Spector, L. F Cherkas, A. Knaapila, K. Silventoinen, and M. Perola Same genetic components underlie different measures of sweet taste preference Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, December 1, 2007; 86(6): 1663 - 1669. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. L. White, L. V. Dishaw, P. R. Sheehe, and S. L. Youngentob The Relationship between PROP and Ethanol Preferences: An Evaluation of 4 Inbred Mouse Strains Chem Senses, November 1, 2007; 32(9): 847 - 853. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. M. Wise, J. L. Hansen, D. R. Reed, and P. A.S. Breslin Twin Study of the Heritability of Recognition Thresholds for Sour and Salty Taste Chem Senses, October 1, 2007; 32(8): 749 - 754. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Keskitalo, A. Knaapila, M. Kallela, A. Palotie, M. Wessman, S. Sammalisto, L. Peltonen, H. Tuorila, and M. Perola Sweet taste preferences are partly genetically determined: identification of a trait locus on chromosome 16 Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, July 1, 2007; 86(1): 55 - 63. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. S.J. Keast and J. Roper A Complex Relationship among Chemical Concentration, Detection Threshold, and Suprathreshold Intensity of Bitter Compounds Chem Senses, March 1, 2007; 32(3): 245 - 253. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||

