Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Olfactory stimulation variables. Which model best predicts the olfactory nerve response?

D B Kurtz, M M Mozell

    The Journal of General Physiology
    |September 1, 1985
    PubMed
    Summary

    This study validates Mozell et al.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Mucosal activity patterns as a basis for olfactory discrimination: comparing behavior and optical recordings.

    Brain research·2003
    Same author

    Effect of nasal dilators on nasal structures, sniffing strategies, and olfactory ability.

    Rhinology·2001
    Same author

    Odorant confusion matrix: the influence of patient history on patterns of odorant identification and misidentification in hyposmia.

    Physiology & behavior·2001
    Same author

    Sequence and analysis of chromosome 1 of the plant Arabidopsis thaliana.

    Nature·2000
    Same author

    Odorant quality perception: a metric individual differences approach.

    Perception & psychophysics·2000
    Same author

    The labeled dissimilarity scale: a metric of perceptual dissimilarity.

    Perception & psychophysics·2000

    Area of Science:

    • Olfactory neuroscience
    • Sensory physiology
    • Chemoreception

    Background:

    • Traditional models of olfactory stimulus-response relationships often lack predictive power.
    • Mozell et al. proposed a three-variable model (odorant molecules N, stimulus duration T, stimulus volume V) and derived models ([F, N], [C, T], [D, V]) to explain olfactory nerve response.
    • The predictive accuracy of these derived models varies, with [F, N] and [C, T] showing promise, while [D, V] performed poorly.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To experimentally assess the validity of olfactory stimulus-response models proposed by Mozell et al.
    • To test specific predictions derived from the [F, N], [C, T], and [D, V] models.
    • To determine the most applicable model for peripheral olfactory processing.

    Main Methods:

    • Experimental manipulation of stimulus parameters: flow rate (F), number of odorant molecules (N), concentration (C), stimulus duration (T), stimulus volume (V), and delivery rate (D).
    • Controlled experiments holding specific variables constant while proportionally increasing others, based on model predictions.
    • Measurement and statistical analysis of olfactory nerve responses to varying stimuli.

    Main Results:

    • Olfactory response remained constant when flow rate (F) and number of molecules (N) were held constant, supporting the [F, N] model.
    • Olfactory response increased significantly when delivery rate (D) and volume (V) were held constant, contradicting the [D, V] model.
    • A small but statistically significant change in response occurred when concentration (C) and duration (T) were constant, partially supporting the [C, T] model.

    Conclusions:

    • The experimental results strongly support the [F, N] model for peripheral olfactory processing.
    • The findings validate the approach of Mozell et al. in characterizing olfactory stimulus-response relationships.
    • This study refines our understanding of how olfactory stimuli are processed at the neural level.

    Related Experiment Videos