- Email: [email protected]
Adventures in PROP tasting1
11. 12. 13.
14.
15.
16. 17. 18. 19.
20.
21.
22.
anol in PROP tasters and nontasters. Chem Senses. 2000;25:239-246. Duffy V, Peterson J. Genetic variation in taste: Association with alcohol sensation and intake. Chem Senses. 2000;25:638. Bartoshuk LM. The biological basis of food perception and acceptance. Food Qual Pref. 1993;4:21-32. Prescott J, Stevenson RJ. Psychophysical responses to single and multiple presentations of the oral irritant zingerone: Relationship to frequency of chili consumption. Physiol Behav. 1996;60:617-624. Drewnowski A, Henderson SA, Levine A, Hann C. Taste and food preferences as predictors of dietary practices in young women. Public Health Nutr. 1999; 2:513-519. Gayathri Devi A, Henderson SA, Drewnowski A. Sensory acceptance of Japanese green tea and soy products is linked to genetic sensitivity to 6-n-propylthiouracil. Nutr Cancer. 1997;29:146-151. Glanville EV, Kaplan AR. Food preferences and sensitivity of taste for bitter compounds. Nature. 1965; 205:851-852. Intranuovo LR, Powers AS. The perceived bitterness of beer and 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP) taste sensitivity. Ann NY Acad Sci. 1998;855:813-815. Mela DJ. Gustatory perception of isohumulones: Influence of sex and thiourea taster status. Chem Senses. 1990;15:485-490. Keller KL, Steinmann L, Nurse RJ, Tepper BJ. Genetic taste sensitivity to 6-n-propylthiouracil influences food preference and reported intake in preschool children. Appetite. 2002;38:3-12. Turnbull B, Matisoo-Smith E. Taste sensitivity to 6-n-propylthiouracil predicts acceptance of bittertasting spinach in 3-6-yr-old children. Am J Clin Nutr. 2002;76:1101-1105. Anliker JA, Bartoshuk LM, Ferris AM, Hooks LD. Children’s food preferences and genetic sensitivity to the bitter taste of 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP). Am J Clin Nutr. 1991;54:316-320. Nieswind A, Krondi M, Shrott M. Genetic influences on the selection of brassica vegetables by elderly individuals. Nutr Res. 1988;8:13-20.
23. Jerzsa-Latta M, Krondl M, Coleman P. Use and perceived attributes of cruciferous vegetables in terms of genetically-mediated taste sensitivity. Appetite. 1990;15:127-134. 24. Mattes R, Labov J. Bitter taste responses to phenylthiocarbamide are not related to dietary goitrogen intake in human beings. J Am Diet Assoc. 1989;89: 692-694. 25. Drewnowski A, Henderson SA, Hann CS, Berg WA, Ruffin MT. Genetic taste markers and preferences for vegetables and fruit of female breast care patients. J Am Diet Assoc. 2000;100:191-197. 26. Duffy VB, Bartoshuk LM. Food acceptance and genetic variation in taste. J Am Diet Assoc. 2000;100: 647-655. 27. Rozin P, Vollmecke TA. Food likes and dislikes. Annu Rev Nutr. 1986;6:433-456. 28. Pliner P, Hobden K. Development of a scale to measure the trait of food neophobia in humans. Appetite. 1992;19:105-120. 29. Logue AW, Smith ME. Predictors of food preferences in adult humans. Appetite. 1986;7:109-125. 30. Raudenbush B, van der Klaauw NJ, Frank RA. The contribution of psychological and sensory factors to food preference patterns as measured by the Food Attitudes Survey (FAS). Appetite. 1995;25:1-15. 31. Tepper BJ, Christensen CM, Cao J. Development of brief methods to classify individuals by PROP taster status. Physiol Behav. 2001;73:571-577. 32. Green BG, Dalton P, Cowart B, Shaffer G, Rankin K, Higgins J. Evaluating the ‘Labeled Magnitude Scale’ for measuring sensations of taste and smell. Chem Senses. 1996;21:323-334. 33. Marija J. Norvsis: SPSS-X Introductory Statistics Guide, Release 3. Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc; 1988. 34. Lebart L, Morineau A, Warwick KM. Multivariate Descriptive Statistical Analysis. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 1984. 35. Zhao L, Kirkmeyer SV, Tepper BJ. A paper screening test to assess genetic taste sensitivity to 6-n-propylthiouracil. Physiol Behav. 2003;78:625-633.
APPLICATIONS
Adventures in PROP Tasting
T
ailoring a meal plan to a client or patient can be a challenging task. There are many personal attributes and varying likes and dislikes to consider. Ullrich and colleagues set out to examine the influence of
This article was written by Kimberly Thedford, MS, RD, acting associate editor of the Journal in Chicago, IL. doi: 10.1016/j.jada.2004.02.019
PROP (6-n-propylthiouracil) taster status and food adventurousness on 232 healthy adults (1). The researchers found that food adventurousness had no impact on selfreported likes and dislikes of participants categorized as nontasters. PROP tasters who were food adventurous expressed similar interests in eating a wide variety of foods. Participants who were PROP tasters and not food adventurous exhibited a more condensed variety of foods liked. They also found that PROP taster participants
Journal of THE AMERICAN DIETETIC ASSOCIATION
549
with greater food adventurousness had a greater liking of bitter, hot, and pungent foods, while the nontasters exhibited the classic dislike of these foods. Diets high in fruits and vegetables have been associated with a decreased risk of cancer (2). Drewnowski and Gomez-Carneros discuss the quandary of how the most potent plant-based foods for improved health and reduced risk of disease are also most likely to be the most bitter and aversive (3). This raises another interesting dilemma. Are individuals who have a greater tendency for detecting a bitter taste more inclined to have a decreased intake of fruit and vegetables? Drewnowski and colleagues conducted another study where they tested a PROP paper test to utilize in epidemiological studies as a screening tool (4). In this study, they measured dietary intake through a dietary behavior questionnaire (estimating servings per day of fruit and vegetable intakes), and a food frequency questionnaire was also used as a sub-cohort. The researchers found no association between PROP taster status and dietary intake. However, for the smaller sub-cohort who completed the food frequency questionnaire, the researchers found that participants who tested positive for a PROP taster had a lower, but not significant, intake of cruciferous vegetables. Ullrich and colleagues weigh in on this dilemma. If an individual is more food adventurous, then they are more likely to behave like a non-taster in that they will like a variety of foods. It would be more predictive to assess an adult individual’s food adventurousness in conjunction with a PROP taster test to provide insight on the barriers
550
April 2004 Volume 104 Number 4
one might encounter in a practice setting with either a patient or client. The question still looms for young children for whom food adventurousness is still being defined by family and culture. This study adds to the body of evidence of PROP taster research. Dietitians can utilize this information to confirm that there are individuals who will express aversion to certain tastes, specifically those associated with vegetables rich in phytochemicals (3). Some approval will naturally occur with age and general acceptability. However, those who still grapple with this issue of taste will need to be counseled on alternative methods to individualize palatability of these desired foods. References 1. Ullrich NV, Touger-Decker R, O’Sullivan Maillet J, Tepper BJ. PROP taster status and self-perceived food adventurousness influence food preferences. J Am Diet Assoc. 2004;104:543-549. 2. Steinmetz KA, Potter JD. Vegetables, fruit and cancer prevention: A review. J Amer Diet Assoc. 1996;96: 1027-1039. 3. Drewnowski A, Gomez-Carneros C. Bitter taste, phytonutrients, and the consumer: A review. Am J Clin Nutr. 2000;72:1424-1435. 4. Drewnowski A, Kristal A, Cohen J. Genetic taste responses to 6-n-propylthiouracil among adults: A screening tool for epidemiological studies. Chem Senses. 2001;26:483-489.
14.
15.
16. 17. 18. 19.
20.
21.
22.
anol in PROP tasters and nontasters. Chem Senses. 2000;25:239-246. Duffy V, Peterson J. Genetic variation in taste: Association with alcohol sensation and intake. Chem Senses. 2000;25:638. Bartoshuk LM. The biological basis of food perception and acceptance. Food Qual Pref. 1993;4:21-32. Prescott J, Stevenson RJ. Psychophysical responses to single and multiple presentations of the oral irritant zingerone: Relationship to frequency of chili consumption. Physiol Behav. 1996;60:617-624. Drewnowski A, Henderson SA, Levine A, Hann C. Taste and food preferences as predictors of dietary practices in young women. Public Health Nutr. 1999; 2:513-519. Gayathri Devi A, Henderson SA, Drewnowski A. Sensory acceptance of Japanese green tea and soy products is linked to genetic sensitivity to 6-n-propylthiouracil. Nutr Cancer. 1997;29:146-151. Glanville EV, Kaplan AR. Food preferences and sensitivity of taste for bitter compounds. Nature. 1965; 205:851-852. Intranuovo LR, Powers AS. The perceived bitterness of beer and 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP) taste sensitivity. Ann NY Acad Sci. 1998;855:813-815. Mela DJ. Gustatory perception of isohumulones: Influence of sex and thiourea taster status. Chem Senses. 1990;15:485-490. Keller KL, Steinmann L, Nurse RJ, Tepper BJ. Genetic taste sensitivity to 6-n-propylthiouracil influences food preference and reported intake in preschool children. Appetite. 2002;38:3-12. Turnbull B, Matisoo-Smith E. Taste sensitivity to 6-n-propylthiouracil predicts acceptance of bittertasting spinach in 3-6-yr-old children. Am J Clin Nutr. 2002;76:1101-1105. Anliker JA, Bartoshuk LM, Ferris AM, Hooks LD. Children’s food preferences and genetic sensitivity to the bitter taste of 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP). Am J Clin Nutr. 1991;54:316-320. Nieswind A, Krondi M, Shrott M. Genetic influences on the selection of brassica vegetables by elderly individuals. Nutr Res. 1988;8:13-20.
23. Jerzsa-Latta M, Krondl M, Coleman P. Use and perceived attributes of cruciferous vegetables in terms of genetically-mediated taste sensitivity. Appetite. 1990;15:127-134. 24. Mattes R, Labov J. Bitter taste responses to phenylthiocarbamide are not related to dietary goitrogen intake in human beings. J Am Diet Assoc. 1989;89: 692-694. 25. Drewnowski A, Henderson SA, Hann CS, Berg WA, Ruffin MT. Genetic taste markers and preferences for vegetables and fruit of female breast care patients. J Am Diet Assoc. 2000;100:191-197. 26. Duffy VB, Bartoshuk LM. Food acceptance and genetic variation in taste. J Am Diet Assoc. 2000;100: 647-655. 27. Rozin P, Vollmecke TA. Food likes and dislikes. Annu Rev Nutr. 1986;6:433-456. 28. Pliner P, Hobden K. Development of a scale to measure the trait of food neophobia in humans. Appetite. 1992;19:105-120. 29. Logue AW, Smith ME. Predictors of food preferences in adult humans. Appetite. 1986;7:109-125. 30. Raudenbush B, van der Klaauw NJ, Frank RA. The contribution of psychological and sensory factors to food preference patterns as measured by the Food Attitudes Survey (FAS). Appetite. 1995;25:1-15. 31. Tepper BJ, Christensen CM, Cao J. Development of brief methods to classify individuals by PROP taster status. Physiol Behav. 2001;73:571-577. 32. Green BG, Dalton P, Cowart B, Shaffer G, Rankin K, Higgins J. Evaluating the ‘Labeled Magnitude Scale’ for measuring sensations of taste and smell. Chem Senses. 1996;21:323-334. 33. Marija J. Norvsis: SPSS-X Introductory Statistics Guide, Release 3. Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc; 1988. 34. Lebart L, Morineau A, Warwick KM. Multivariate Descriptive Statistical Analysis. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 1984. 35. Zhao L, Kirkmeyer SV, Tepper BJ. A paper screening test to assess genetic taste sensitivity to 6-n-propylthiouracil. Physiol Behav. 2003;78:625-633.
APPLICATIONS
Adventures in PROP Tasting
T
ailoring a meal plan to a client or patient can be a challenging task. There are many personal attributes and varying likes and dislikes to consider. Ullrich and colleagues set out to examine the influence of
This article was written by Kimberly Thedford, MS, RD, acting associate editor of the Journal in Chicago, IL. doi: 10.1016/j.jada.2004.02.019
PROP (6-n-propylthiouracil) taster status and food adventurousness on 232 healthy adults (1). The researchers found that food adventurousness had no impact on selfreported likes and dislikes of participants categorized as nontasters. PROP tasters who were food adventurous expressed similar interests in eating a wide variety of foods. Participants who were PROP tasters and not food adventurous exhibited a more condensed variety of foods liked. They also found that PROP taster participants
Journal of THE AMERICAN DIETETIC ASSOCIATION
549
with greater food adventurousness had a greater liking of bitter, hot, and pungent foods, while the nontasters exhibited the classic dislike of these foods. Diets high in fruits and vegetables have been associated with a decreased risk of cancer (2). Drewnowski and Gomez-Carneros discuss the quandary of how the most potent plant-based foods for improved health and reduced risk of disease are also most likely to be the most bitter and aversive (3). This raises another interesting dilemma. Are individuals who have a greater tendency for detecting a bitter taste more inclined to have a decreased intake of fruit and vegetables? Drewnowski and colleagues conducted another study where they tested a PROP paper test to utilize in epidemiological studies as a screening tool (4). In this study, they measured dietary intake through a dietary behavior questionnaire (estimating servings per day of fruit and vegetable intakes), and a food frequency questionnaire was also used as a sub-cohort. The researchers found no association between PROP taster status and dietary intake. However, for the smaller sub-cohort who completed the food frequency questionnaire, the researchers found that participants who tested positive for a PROP taster had a lower, but not significant, intake of cruciferous vegetables. Ullrich and colleagues weigh in on this dilemma. If an individual is more food adventurous, then they are more likely to behave like a non-taster in that they will like a variety of foods. It would be more predictive to assess an adult individual’s food adventurousness in conjunction with a PROP taster test to provide insight on the barriers
550
April 2004 Volume 104 Number 4
one might encounter in a practice setting with either a patient or client. The question still looms for young children for whom food adventurousness is still being defined by family and culture. This study adds to the body of evidence of PROP taster research. Dietitians can utilize this information to confirm that there are individuals who will express aversion to certain tastes, specifically those associated with vegetables rich in phytochemicals (3). Some approval will naturally occur with age and general acceptability. However, those who still grapple with this issue of taste will need to be counseled on alternative methods to individualize palatability of these desired foods. References 1. Ullrich NV, Touger-Decker R, O’Sullivan Maillet J, Tepper BJ. PROP taster status and self-perceived food adventurousness influence food preferences. J Am Diet Assoc. 2004;104:543-549. 2. Steinmetz KA, Potter JD. Vegetables, fruit and cancer prevention: A review. J Amer Diet Assoc. 1996;96: 1027-1039. 3. Drewnowski A, Gomez-Carneros C. Bitter taste, phytonutrients, and the consumer: A review. Am J Clin Nutr. 2000;72:1424-1435. 4. Drewnowski A, Kristal A, Cohen J. Genetic taste responses to 6-n-propylthiouracil among adults: A screening tool for epidemiological studies. Chem Senses. 2001;26:483-489.