New insights into the relationship between taste perception and oral microbiota composition
Open accessAbstract
Fairly poor data are available on the relationship between taste perception, food preferences and oral microbiota. In the present study, we investigated the hypothesis that subjects with higher responsiveness to 6-n-propylthiuracil (PROP) might be characterized by a different taste sensitivity and tongue microbiota composition. Indeed, the bacterial metabolism may modulate/enhance the concentration of tastants near the taste receptors, modifying taste perception through a sensorial adaptation mechanism or by a broad range of microbial metabolic pathways. The detection thresholds of sweet, sour, salty and bitter, the Fungiform Papillae Density (FPD) and the composition of bacteria lining the tongue were determined in Supertasters (high PROP responsiveness, ST) and Non-tasters (low PROP responsiveness, NT). An important inter-individual variability was found for all taste stimuli and FPD between the two groups, with NT subjects showing significant higher threshold values and a lower FPD than with STs. We found five bacterial genera whose relative abundances were significantly higher in STs than NTs. This study opens new avenues of research by highlighting associations between parameters usually studied independently.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Certain bacteria, such as some Clostridia and Prevotella species, have been associated with taste thresholds, such as sweet, sour, salty, and bitter, plausibly representing a mechanism by which the oral microbiota influences dietary preferences.
“Certain bacteria, such as some Clostridia and Prevotella species, have been associated with taste thresholds, such as sweet, sour, salty, and bitter, plausibly representing a mechanism by which the oral microbiota influences dietary preferences to sustain its membership and persistence in the oral cavity.27, 28”
From The oral microbiome: Role of key organisms and complex networks in oral health and disease (2021) · cites this paper as [27]
Lower thresholds for sweet, sour, salty, and bitter tastes were observed for supertasters than for tasters, and density of fungiform papillae was higher in supertasters.
“Lower thresholds for sweet, sour, salty, and bitter tastes were observed for supertasters than for tasters, and the density of fungiform papillae was higher in supertasters.”
From The oral microbiome: Role of key organisms and complex networks in oral health and disease (2021) · cites this paper as [27]
A recent study of healthy subjects defined as nontasters or supertasters examined the potential link between taste and the tongue microbiota.
“A recent study of healthy subjects defined as nontasters or supertasters (medium tasters were excluded) examined the potential link between taste and the tongue microbiota.”
From The oral microbiome: Role of key organisms and complex networks in oral health and disease (2021) · cites this paper as [27]
Through 16S ribosomal RNA gene profiling, the study found higher relative abundances of Actinomyces, Oribacterium, Campylobacter, Solobacterium, and Catonella species in tongue dorsum microbiotas of supertasters than in nontasters.
“Through 16S ribosomal RNA gene profiling, the study also found higher relative abundances of Actinomyces, Oribacterium, Campylobacter, Solobacterium, and Catonella species in the tongue dorsum microbiotas of supertasters than in that of nontasters.”
From The oral microbiome: Role of key organisms and complex networks in oral health and disease (2021) · cites this paper as [27]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 63 · Cited by 93
- Authors
- Cattaneo, C., Gargari, G., Koirala, R., Laureati, M., Riso, P., Guglielmetti, S., & Pagliarini, E.
- Affiliations
- University of Milan (IT)
- Corresponding author
- Cattaneo, Camilla
- ORCID
- Venue
- Scientific Reports
- Published
- 2019-03-05
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 3549-3549
- ISSN
- 2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC6401163
- OpenAlex
- W2919175067
- Cited by
- 93
- References
- 63
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 7
- FWCI
- 10.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Archivio Istituzionale della Ricerca (Universita Degli Studi Di Milano) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- BOA (University of Milano-Bicocca) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Università degli Studi di Milano (PSR 2017)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Biochemical Analysis and Sensing Techniques
- Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Oral microbiology and periodontitis research
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Olfactory and Sensory Function Studies
- Keywords
- taste perception, oral microbiota, tongue microbiota, 6-n-propylthiouracil, supertasters, taste sensitivity, taste detection threshold, bacterial metabolism, food preferences, interindividual variability
- MeSH terms
- Female, Humans, Male, Tongue, Taste Perception, Young Adult, Microbiota
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
