Abstract
Using an operant conditioning paradigm, we tested the ability of CD-1 mice to discriminate between members of a homologous series of aliphatic aldehydes presented at four different concentrations. We found that the mice were clearly capable of discriminating between all odorant pairs when stimuli were presented at concentrations of 1, 0.01, and 0.001 ppm (corresponding to four, two, and one log unit above the highest individual detection threshold) with no significant difference in performance between these concentrations. In contrast, the animals generally failed to discriminate above chance level when stimuli were presented at 0.0001 ppm (corresponding to the highest individual detection threshold) although stimuli were clearly detectable. Further, we found a significant negative correlation between discrimination performance and structural similarity of odorants in terms of differences in carbon chain length. These findings suggest that an increase in stimulus concentration of only one log unit above detection threshold appears to be sufficient for recruitment of additional subpopulations of odorant receptors to allow for qualitative recognition of aliphatic aldehydes.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abraham NM, Spors H, Carleton A, Margrie TW, Kuner T, Schaefer AT (2004) Maintaining accuracy at the expense of speed: stimulus similarity defines odor discrimination time in mice. Neuron 44:865–876
Bodyak N, Slotnick B (1999) Performance of mice in an automated olfactometer: odor detection, discrimination and odor memory. Chem Senses 24:637–645
Cleland TA, Narla VA (2003) Intensity modulation of olfactory acuity. Behav Neurosci 117:1434–1440
Doty RL, Laing DG (2003) Psychophysical measurement of human olfactory function, including odorant mixture assessment. In: Doty RL (ed) Handbook of olfaction and gustation, 2nd edn. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 203–228
Fine-Levy JB, Derby CD (1991) Effects of stimulus intensity and quality on discrimination of odorant mixtures by spiny lobsters in an associative learing paradigm. Physiol Behav 49:1163–1168
Firestein S, Shepherd GM, Werblin FS (1990) Time course of the membrane current underlying sensory transduction in salamander olfactory receptor neurones. J Physiol 430:135–158
Fried HU, Fuss SH, Korsching SI (2002) Selective imaging of presynaptic activity in the mouse olfactory bulb shows concentration and structure dependence of odor responses in identified glomeruli. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:3222–3227
Glusman G, Yanai I, Rubin I, Lancet D (2001) The complete human olfactory subgenome. Genome Res 11:685–702
Godfrey PA, Malnic B, Buck LB (2004) The mouse olfactory receptor gene family. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101:2156–2161
Grosmaitre X, Vassalli A, Mombaerts P, Shepherd GM, Ma M (2006) Odorant responses of olfactory sensory neurons expressing the odorant receptor MOR23: a patch clamp analysis in gene-targeted mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:1970–1975
Gross-Isseroff R, Lancet D (1988) Concentration-dependent changes of perceived odor quality. Chem Senses 13:191–204
Hudson R, Arriola A, Martinez-Gomez M, Distel H (2006) Effect of air pollution on olfactory function in residents of Mexico City. Chem Senses 31:79–85
Johnson BA, Leon M (2000a) Odorant molecular length: one aspect of the olfactory code. J Comp Neurol 426:330–338
Johnson BA, Leon M (2000b) Modular representations of odorants in the glomerular layer of the rat olfactory bulb and the effects of stimulus concentration. J Comp Neurol 422:496–509
Johnson BA, Farahbod H, Saber S, Leon M (2005) Effects of functional group position on spatial representations of aliphatic odorants in the rat olfactory bulb. J Comp Neurol 483:192–204
Joshi D, Völkl M, Shepherd GM, Laska M (2006) Olfactory sensitivity for enantiomers and their racemic mixtures—a comparative study in CD-1 mice and spider monkeys. Chem Senses 31:655–664
Knudsen JT, Tollsten L, Bergström LG (1993) Floral scents—a checklist of volatile compounds isolated by head-space techniques. Phytochemistry 33:253–280
Krautwurst D, Yau KW, Reed RR (1998) Identification of ligands for olfactory receptors by functional expression of a receptor library. Cell 95:917–926
Laing DG, Legha PK, Jinks AL, Hutchinson I (2003) Relationship between molecular structure, concentration and odor qualities of oxygenated aliphatic molecules. Chem Senses 28:57–69
Lancet D, Sadovsky E, Seidemann E (1993) Probability model for molecular recognition in biological receptor repertoires: significance to the olfactory system. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 90:3715–3719
Laska M, Shepherd GM (2007) Olfactory discrimination ability of CD-1 mice for a large array of enantiomers. Neuroscience 144:295–301
Laska M, Teubner P (1999) Olfactory discrimination ability for homologous series of aliphatic alcohols and aldehydes. Chem Senses 24:263–270
Laska M, Galizia CG, Giurfa M, Menzel R (1999a) Olfactory discrimination ability and odor structure–activity relationships in honeybees. Chem Senses 24:429–438
Laska M, Trolp S, Teubner P (1999b) Odor structure–activity relationships compared in human and nonhuman primates. Behav Neurosci 113:998–1007
Laska M, Wieser A, Hernandez Salazar LT (2005) Olfactory responsiveness to two odorous steroids in three species of nonhuman primates. Chem Senses 30:505–511
Laska M, Joshi D, Shepherd GM (2006) Olfactory sensitivity for aliphatic aldehydes in CD-1 mice. Behav Brain Res 167:349–354
Leon M, Johnson BA (2003) Olfactory coding in the mammalian olfactory bulb. Brain Res Rev 42:23–32
McBride K, Slotnick B (2006) Discrimination between the enantiomers of carvone and those of terpinen-4-ol in normal rats and those with lesions of the olfactory bulbs. J Neurosci 26:9892–9901
Neuhaus W (1957) Wahrnehmungsschwelle und Erkennungsschwelle beim Riechen des Hundes im Vergleich zu den Riechwahrnehmungen des Menschen. Z Vergl Physiol 39:624–633
Pelz C, Gerber B, Menzel R (1997) Odorant intensity as a determinant for olfactory conditioning in honeybees: roles in discrimination, overshadowing and memory consolidation. J Exp Biol 200:837–847
Robertson HM, Wanner KW (2006) The chemoreceptor superfamily in the honey bee Apis mellifera: expansion of the odorant, but not gustatory, receptor family. Genome Res 16:1395–1403
Röck F, Mueller S, Weimar U, Rammensee HG, Overath P (2006) Comparative analysis of volatile constituents from mice and their urine. J Chem Ecol 32:1333–1346
Rouquier S, Blancher A, Giorgi D (2000) The olfactory receptor gene repertoire in primates and mouse: evidence for reduction of the functional fraction in primates. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97:2870–2874
Scott JW, Acevedo HP, Sherrill L (2006) Effects of concentration and sniff flow rate on the rat electroolfactogram. Chem Senses 31:581–593
Stuck BA, Frey S, Freiburg C, Hörmann K, Zahnert T, Hummel T (2006) Chemosensory event-related potentials in relation to side of stimulation, age, sex, and stimulus concentration. Clin Neurophysiol 117:1367–1375
Wilson DA, Stevenson RJ (2006) The relationship between stimulus intensity and perceptual quality. In: Wilson DA, Stevenson RJ (eds) Learning to smell. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp 64–75
Wright GA, Smith BH (2004) Different thresholds for detection and discrimination of odors in the honey bee (Apis mellifera). Chem Senses 29:127–135
Xu F, Liu N, Kida I, Rothman DL, Hyder F, Shepherd GM (2003) Odor maps of aldehydes and esters revealed by functional MRI in the glomerular layer of the mouse olfactory bulb. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:11029–11034
Acknowledgments
GMS is supported by NIH grant (5 R01 DC00086-38) and the Human Brain Project. The experiments reported here comply with the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (National Institutes of Health Publication no. 86-23, revised 1985) and were performed according to a protocol approved by the Yale University Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Laska, M., Joshi, D. & Shepherd, G.M. Olfactory discrimination ability of CD-1 mice for aliphatic aldehydes as a function of stimulus concentration. J Comp Physiol A 193, 955–961 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00359-007-0248-4
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00359-007-0248-4