Intramodal Olfactory Priming of Positive and Negative Odors in Humans Using Respiration-Triggered Olfactory Stimulation (RETROS)

Elevated Insulin Levels Engage the Salience Network during Multisensory Perception

INTRODUCTION

Brain insulin reactivity has been reported in connection with systematic energy metabolism, enhancement in cognition, olfactory sensitivity, and neuroendocrine circuits. High receptor densities exist in regions important for sensory processing. The main aim of the study was to examine whether intranasal insulin would modulate the activity of areas in charge of olfactory-visual integration.

METHODS

As approach, a placebo-controlled double-blind within crossover design was chosen. The experiments were conducted in a research unit of a university hospital. On separate mornings, twenty-six healthy normal-weight males aged between 19 and 31 years received either 40 IU intranasal insulin or placebo vehicle. Subsequently, they underwent 65 min of functional magnetic resonance imaging whilst performing an odor identification task. Functional brain activations of olfactory, visual, and multisensory integration as well as insulin versus placebo were assessed. Regarding the odor identification task, reaction time, accuracy, pleasantness, and intensity measurements were taken to examine the role of integration and treatment. Blood samples were drawn to control for peripheral hormone concentrations.

RESULTS

Intranasal insulin administration during olfactory-visual stimulation revealed strong bilateral engagement of frontoinsular cortices, anterior cingulate, prefrontal cortex, mediodorsal thalamus, striatal, and hippocampal regions (p ≤ 0.001 familywise error [FWE] corrected). In addition, the integration contrast showed increased activity in left intraparietal sulcus, left inferior frontal gyrus, left superior frontal gyrus, and left middle frontal gyrus (p ≤ 0.013 FWE corrected).

CONCLUSIONS

Intranasal insulin application in lean men led to enhanced activation in multisensory olfactory-visual integration sites and salience hubs which indicates stimuli valuation modulation. This effect can serve as a basis for understanding the connection of intracerebral insulin and olfactory-visual processing.

Sex Differences in Odor Hedonic Perception: An Overview

Odor hedonic evaluation (pleasant/unpleasant) is considered as the first and one of the most prominent dimension in odor perception. While sex differences in human olfaction have been extensively explored, gender effect in hedonic perception appears to be less considered. However, a number of studies have included comparisons between men and women, using different types of measurements (psychophysical, psychophysiological,…). This overview presents experimental works with non-specific and body odors separately presented as well as experimental studies comparing healthy participants vs patients with psychiatric disorders. Contrary to sensitivity, identification or discrimination, the overall literature tends to prove that no so clear differences occur in odor hedonic judgment between men and women. On the whole, gender effect appears more marked for body than non-specific odors and is almost never reported in psychiatric diseases. These findings are discussed in relation to the processes classically implied in pleasantness rating and emotional processes.

Some like it, some do not: behavioral responses and central processing of olfactory-trigeminal mixture perception

Exploring the potential of eucalyptol as a masking agent for aversive odors, we found that eucalyptol masks the olfactory but not the trigeminal sensation of ammonia in a previous study. Here, we further investigate the processing of a mixture consisting of eucalyptol and ammonia, two olfactory–trigeminal stimuli. We presented the two pure odors and a mixture thereof to 33 healthy participants. The nostrils were stimulated alternately (monorhinal application). We analyzed the behavioral ratings (intensity and pleasantness) and functional brain images. First, we replicated our previous finding that, within the mixture, the eucalyptol component suppressed the olfactory intensity of the ammonia component. Second, mixture pleasantness was rated differently by participants depending on which component dominated their mixture perception. Approximately half of the volunteers rated the eucalyptol component as more intense and evaluated the mixture as pleasant (pleasant group). The other half rated the ammonia component as more intense and evaluated the mixture as unpleasant (unpleasant group). Third, these individual differences were also found in functional imaging data. Contrasting the mixture either to eucalyptol or to both single odors, neural activation was found in the unpleasant group only. Activation in the anterior insula and SII was interpreted as evidence for an attentional shift towards the potentially threatening mixture component ammonia and for trigeminal enhancement. In addition to insula and SII, further regions of the pain matrix were involved when assessing all participant responses to the mixture. Both a painful sensation and an attentional shift towards the unpleasant mixture component complicates the development of an efficient mask because a pleasant perception is an important requirement for malodor coverage.