Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28443629›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2017

Differences in peripheral sensory input to the olfactory bulb between male and female mice.

Marley D Kass, Lindsey A Czarnecki, Andrew H Moberly, John P McGann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Odor exploration behavior of the domestic pig (Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  13. Enhanced autophagy inAutophagy · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Marley D KassBehavioral &Systems Neuroscience Section, Department of Psychology Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 152 Frelinghuysen Road, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA.
Lindsey A CzarneckiBehavioral &Systems Neuroscience Section, Department of Psychology Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 152 Frelinghuysen Road, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA.
Andrew H MoberlyBehavioral &Systems Neuroscience Section, Department of Psychology Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 152 Frelinghuysen Road, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA.
John P McGannBehavioral &Systems Neuroscience Section, Department of Psychology Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 152 Frelinghuysen Road, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA.

Funding

How Fear Learning Alters Sensory Representations of Threat Predictive StimuliR01MH101293 · NIMH · RUTGERS, THE STATE UNIV OF N.J. · PI MCGANN, JOHN P · 2013 to 2023
$4.5M
Sex differences in the neurophysiology of the olfactory systemR01DC013090 · NIDCD · RUTGERS, THE STATE UNIV OF N.J. · PI MCGANN, JOHN P · 2013 to 2017
$2.1M
Effects of fear learning on early olfactory processingF31DC013719 · NIDCD · RUTGERS, THE STATE UNIV OF N.J. · PI KASS, MARLEY D · 2013 to 2015
$69k
NIDCD NIH HHS F31 DC013719NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC013090NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH101293
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Female mammals generally have a superior sense of smell than males, but the biological basis of this difference is unknown. Here, we demonstrate sexually dimorphic neural coding of odorants by olfactory sensory neurons (OSNs), primary sensory neurons that physically contact odor molecules in the nose and provide the initial sensory input to the brain's olfactory bulb. We performed in vivo optical neurophysiology to visualize odorant-evoked OSN synaptic output into olfactory bub glomeruli in unmanipulated (gonad-intact) adult mice from both sexes, and found that in females odorant presentation evoked more rapid OSN signaling over a broader range of OSNs than in males. These spatiotemporal differences enhanced the contrast between the neural representations of chemically related odorants in females compared to males during stimulus presentation. Removing circulating sex hormones makes these signals slower and less discriminable in females, while in males they become faster and more discriminable, suggesting opposite roles for gonadal hormones in influencing male and female olfactory function. These results demonstrate that the famous sex difference in olfactory abilities likely originates in the primary sensory neurons, and suggest that hormonal modulation of the peripheral olfactory system could underlie differences in how males and females experience the olfactory world.

Indexed as

AnimalsFemaleMaleMiceOdorantsOlfactory BulbOlfactory PerceptionOlfactory Receptor NeuronsSmell

Identifiers

PMID28443629
PMCPMC5405412

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.