Recent anecdotal and scientific reports have provided evidence of a link between COVID-19 and chemosensory impairments such as anosmia. However, these reports have downplayed or failed to distinguish potential effects on taste, ignored chemesthesis, and generally lacked quantitative measurements. Here, we report the development, implementation and initial results of a multi-lingual, international questionnaire to assess self-reported quantity and quality of perception in three distinct chemosensory modalities (smell, taste, and chemesthesis) before and during COVID-19. In the first 11 days after questionnaire launch, 4039 participants (2913 women, 1118 men, 8 other, ages 19-79) reported a COVID-19 diagnosis either via laboratory tests or clinical assessment. Importantly, smell, taste and chemesthetic function were each significantly reduced compared to their status before the disease. Difference scores (maximum possible change ±100) revealed a mean reduction of smell (-79.7 ± 28.7, mean ± SD), taste (-69.0 ± 32.6), and chemesthetic (-37.3 ± 36.2) function during COVID-19. Qualitative changes in olfactory ability (parosmia and phantosmia) were relatively rare and correlated with smell loss. Importantly, perceived nasal obstruction did not account for smell loss. Furthermore, chemosensory impairments were similar between participants in the laboratory test and clinical assessment groups. These results show that COVID-19-associated chemosensory impairment is not limited to smell, but also affects taste and chemesthesis. The multimodal impact of COVID-19 and lack of perceived nasal obstruction suggest that SARS-CoV-2 infection may disrupt sensory-neural mechanisms.
Perception of odours can provoke explicit reactions such as judgements of intensity or pleasantness, and implicit output such as skin conductance or heart rate variations. The main purpose of the present experiment was to ascertain: (i) the correlation between odour ratings (intensity, arousal, pleasantness and familiarity) and activation of the autonomic nervous system, and (ii) the inter-correlation between self-report ratings on intensity, arousal, pleasantness and familiarity dimensions in odour perception. Twelve healthy volunteers were tested in two separate sessions. Firstly, subjects were instructed to smell six odorants (isovaleric acid, thiophenol, pyridine, L-menthol, isoamyl acetate, and 1-8 cineole), while skin conductance and heart rate variations were being measured. During this phase, participants were not asked to give any judgement about the odorants. Secondly, subjects were instructed to rate the odorants on dimensions of intensity, pleasantness, arousal and familiarity (self-report ratings), by giving a mark between 1 (not at all intense, arousing, pleasant or familiar) and 9 (extremely intense, arousing, pleasant or familiar). Results indicated: (i) a pleasantness factor correlated with heart rate variations, (ii) an arousal factor correlated with skin conductance variations, and (iii) a strong correlation between the arousal and intensity dimensions. In conclusion, given that these correlations are also found in other studies using visual and auditory stimuli, these findings provide preliminary information suggesting that autonomic variations in response to olfactory stimuli are probably not modality specific, and may be organized along two main dimensions of pleasantness and arousal, at least for the parameters considered (i.e. heart rate and skin conductance).
Central to the concept of attention is the fact that identical stimuli can be processed in different ways. In olfaction, attention may designate the identical flow of air through the nose as either respiration or olfactory exploration. Here we have used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to probe this attentional mechanism in primary olfactory cortex (POC). We report a dissociation in POC that revealed attention-dependent and attention-independent subregions. Whereas a temporal subregion comprising temporal piriform cortex (PirT) responded equally across conditions, a frontal subregion comprising frontal piriform cortex (PirF) and the olfactory tubercle responded preferentially to attended sniffs as opposed to unattended sniffs. In addition, a task-specific anticipatory response occurred in the attention-dependent region only. This dissociation was consistent across two experimental designs: one focusing on sniffs of clean air, the other focusing on odor-laden sniffs. Our findings highlight the role of attention at the earliest cortical levels of olfactory processing.
In a preregistered, cross-sectional study we investigated whether olfactory loss is a reliable predictor of COVID-19 using a crowdsourced questionnaire in 23 languages to assess symptoms in individuals self-reporting recent respiratory illness. We quantified changes in chemosensory abilities during the course of the respiratory illness using 0-100 visual analog scales (VAS) for participants reporting a positive (C19+; n=4148) or negative (C19-; n=546) COVID-19 laboratory test outcome. Logistic regression models identified univariate and multivariate predictors of COVID-19 status and post-COVID-19 olfactory recovery. Both C19+ and C19- groups exhibited smell loss, but it was significantly larger in C19+ participants (mean±SD, C19+: -82.5±27.2 points; C19-: -59.8±37.7). Smell loss during illness was the best predictor of COVID-19 in both univariate and multivariate models (ROC AUC=0.72). Additional variables provide negligible model improvement. VAS ratings of smell loss were more predictive than binary chemosensory yes/no-questions or other cardinal symptoms (e.g., fever). Olfactory recovery within 40 days of respiratory symptom onset was reported for ~50% of participants and was best predicted by time since respiratory symptom onset. We find that quantified smell loss is the best predictor of COVID-19 amongst those with symptoms of respiratory illness. To aid clinicians and contact tracers in identifying individuals with a high likelihood of having COVID-19, we propose a novel 0-10 scale to screen for recent olfactory loss, the ODoR-19. We find that numeric ratings ≤2 indicate high odds of symptomatic COVID-19 (4<OR<10). Once independently validated, this tool could be deployed when viral lab tests are impractical or unavailable.
Odor identity is coded in spatiotemporal patterns of neural activity in the olfactory bulb. Here we asked whether meaningful olfactory information could also be read from the global olfactory neural population response. We applied standard statistical methods of dimensionality-reduction to neural activity from 12 previously published studies using seven different species. Four studies reported olfactory receptor activity, seven reported glomerulus activity, and one reported the activity of projection-neurons. We found two linear axes of neural population activity that accounted for more than half of the variance in neural response across species. The first axis was correlated with the total sum of odor-induced neural activity, and reflected the behavior of approach or withdrawal in animals, and odorant pleasantness in humans. The second and orthogonal axis reflected odorant toxicity across species. We conclude that in parallel with spatiotemporal pattern coding, the olfactory system can use simple global computations to read vital olfactory information from the neural population response.
Neural representations created in the absence of external sensory stimuli are referred to as imagery, and such representations may be augmented by reenactment of sensorimotor processes. We measured nasal airflow in human subjects while they imagined sights, sounds and smells, and only during olfactory imagery did subjects spontaneously enact the motor component of olfaction--that is, they sniffed. Moreover, as in perception, imagery of pleasant odors involved larger sniffs than imagery of unpleasant odors, suggesting that the act of sniffing has a functional role in creating of olfactory percepts.
Bensafi M, Sobel N, Khan RM. Hedonic-specific activity in piriform cortex during odor imagery mimics that during odor perception.
In humans, the pleasantness of odors is a major contributor to social relationships and food intake. Smells evoke attraction and repulsion responses, reflecting the hedonic value of the odorant. While olfactory preferences are known to be strongly modulated by experience and learning, it has been recently suggested that, in humans, the pleasantness of odors may be partly explained by the physicochemical properties of the odorant molecules themselves. If odor hedonic value is indeed predetermined by odorant structure, then it could be hypothesized that other species will show similar odor preferences to humans. Combining behavioral and psychophysical approaches, we here show that odorants rated as pleasant by humans were also those which, behaviorally, mice investigated longer and human subjects sniffed longer, thereby revealing for the first time a component of olfactory hedonic perception conserved across species. Consistent with this, we further show that odor pleasantness rating in humans and investigation time in mice were both correlated with the physicochemical properties of the molecules, suggesting that olfactory preferences are indeed partly engraved in the physicochemical structure of the odorant. That odor preferences are shared between mammal species and are guided by physicochemical features of odorant stimuli strengthens the view that odor preference is partially predetermined. These findings open up new perspectives for the study of the neural mechanisms of hedonic perception.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.