↓ Skip to main content

Crowdsourcing taste research: genetic and phenotypic predictors of bitter taste perception as a model

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#27 of 907)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
18 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
83 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Crowdsourcing taste research: genetic and phenotypic predictors of bitter taste perception as a model
Published in
Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, May 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnint.2014.00033
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicole L. Garneau, Tiffany M. Nuessle, Meghan M. Sloan, Stephanie A. Santorico, Bridget C. Coughlin, John E. Hayes

Abstract

Understanding the influence of taste perception on food choice has captured the interest of academics, industry, and the general public, the latter as evidenced by the extent of popular media coverage and use of the term supertaster. Supertasters are highly sensitive to the bitter tastant propylthiouracil (PROP) and its chemical relative phenylthiocarbamide. The well-researched differences in taste sensitivity to these bitter chemicals are partially controlled by variation in the TAS2R38 gene; however, this variation alone does not explain the supertaster phenomenon. It has been suggested that density of papillae, which house taste buds, may explain supertasting. To address the unresolved role of papillae, we used crowdsourcing in the museum-based Genetics of Taste Lab. This community lab is uniquely situated to attract both a large population of human subjects and host a team of citizen scientists to research population-based questions about human genetics, taste, and health. Using this model, we find that PROP bitterness is not in any way predicted by papillae density. This result holds within the whole sample, when divided into major diplotypes, and when correcting for age, sex, and genotype. Furthermore, it holds when dividing participants into oft-used taster status groups. These data argue against the use of papillae density in predicting taste sensitivity and caution against imprecise use of the term supertaster. Furthermore, it supports a growing volume of evidence that sets the stage for hypergeusia, a reconceptualization of heightened oral sensitivity that is not based solely on PROP or papillae density. Finally, our model demonstrates how community-based research can serve as a unique venue for both study participation and citizen science that makes scientific research accessible and relevant to people's everyday lives.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Unknown 111 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 20%
Student > Master 15 13%
Researcher 13 11%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 18 16%
Unknown 27 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 27 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 8%
Engineering 6 5%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Other 21 18%
Unknown 36 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 73. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 May 2023.
All research outputs
#579,330
of 25,210,618 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
#27
of 907 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,187
of 233,139 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
#2
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,210,618 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 907 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 233,139 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.