Cited by 83Biochemical Analysis and Sensing TechniquesOlfactory and Sensory Function StudiesRegulation of Appetite and Obesity

The cortical response to the oral perception of fat emulsions and the effect of taster status

Open access
Eldeghaidy, Sally, Marciani, Luca, McGlone, Francis, Hollowood, Tracey, Hort, Joanne, Head, Kay, Taylor, Andrew J., Busch, Johanneke +3 more·2011·Journal of Neurophysiology

Abstract

The rewarding attributes of foods containing fat are associated with the increase in fat consumption, but little is known of how the complex physical and chemical properties of orally ingested fats are represented and decoded in the brain nor how this impacts feeding behavior within the population. Here, functional MRI (fMRI) is used to assess the brain response to isoviscous, isosweet fat emulsions of increasing fat concentration and to investigate the correlation of behavioral and neuroimaging responses with taster status (TS). Cortical areas activated in response to fat, and those areas positively correlated with fat concentration, were identified. Significant responses that positively correlated with increasing fat concentration were found in the anterior insula, frontal operculum and secondary somatosensory cortex (SII), anterior cingulate cortex, and amygdala. Assessing the effect of TS revealed a strong correlation with self-reported preference of the samples and with cortical response in somatosensory areas [primary somatosensory cortex (SI), SII, and midinsula] and the primary taste area (anterior insula) and a trend in reward areas (amygdala and orbitofrontal cortex). This finding of a strong correlation with TS in somatosensory areas supports the theory of increased mechanosensory trigeminal innervation in high 6-n-propyl-2-thiouracil (PROP) tasters and has been linked to a higher risk of obesity. The interindividual differences in blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) amplitude with TS indicates that segmenting populations by TS will reduce the heterogeneity of BOLD responses, improving signal detection power.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/jn.00927.2010

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Duffy VB, Weingarten HP, Bartoshuk LM. Preference for sweet in young adults associated with PROP (6-n-propylthiouracil) genetic taster status and sex (Abstract). Chem Senses 20: 688, 1995 [Google Scholar]
  2. Posse S, Wiese S, Gembris D, Mathiak K, Kessler C, Grosse-Ruyken ML, Elghahwagi B, Richards T, Dager SR, Kiselev VG. Enhancement of BOLD-contrast sensitivity by single-shot multi-echo functional MR imaging. Magn Reson Med 42: 87–97, 1999 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Schiffman SS, Graham BG, Sattely-Miller EA, Warwick ZS. Detection thresholds for emulsified oils in young and elderly subjects. Chem Senses 17: 693–694, 1992 [Google Scholar]
  4. Small DM, Homanchuk J, Zatorre RJ, Jones-Gotman M. Increased taste sensitivity in patients with right temporal lobe epilepsy. Epilepsia 40, Suppl 7: 54, 1999a [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Eldeghaidy, S., Marciani, L., McGlone, F., Hollowood, T., Hort, J., Head, K., Taylor, A. J., Busch, J., Spiller, R. C., Gowland, P. A., & Francis, S. T.
Affiliations
  • University of Nottingham (GB)
  • Unilever Research and Development Vlaardingen (NL)
  • NIHR Biomedical Research Unit, Nottingham Digestive Diseases Center, Nottingham University Hospitals, University of Nottingham, Nottingham;
Corresponding author
Francis, Susan T.
Venue
Journal of Neurophysiology
Published
2011-05
Volume
105
Issue
5
Pages
2572-2581
ISSN
  • 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1598
OpenAlex
W2089805329
Cited by
83
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 7
FWCI
7.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neurophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Biochemical Analysis and Sensing Techniques
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Olfactory and Sensory Function Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Regulation of Appetite and Obesity
Keywords
lipid emulsions, food reward, anterior insula, somatosensory cortex, obesity risk, food preferences, interindividual variability
MeSH terms
Adult, Cerebral Cortex, Dietary Fats, Emulsions, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Mouth, Taste, Emulsifying Agents, Young Adult

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