Introduction To examine the interaction between an added flavoring (cherry) and nicotine on the perception of electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) aerosol and how this impacts the appeal of flavored liquids for e-cigarette (e-liquids). Methods A total of 19 subjects (13 male, 6 female) vaped six commercially available e-liquids with varying contents of nicotine (0, 6, 12 mg/mL) and cherry flavor (4.7% or 9.3% vol/vol). For each e-liquid, subjects first rated overall liking/disliking of the aerosol using the Labeled Hedonic Scale, followed by perceived intensities of sweetness, bitterness, harshness (irritation), and cherry flavor of the aerosol using the general version of Labeled Magnitude Scale. Results The main findings were that (1) added nicotine increased perceived irritation and bitterness, and decreased the perceived sweetness of the e-cigarette aerosol; (2) cherry flavoring added a characteristic “cherry flavor” and an increase in the flavoring concentration from 4.7% to 9.3% tended to increase perceived intensities of sweetness, harshness, and bitterness; and (3) hedonic ratings of the e-cigarette aerosol decreased as nicotine level increased, but were not affected by flavor level. Conclusions Our findings indicate that the appeal of the e-cigarette aerosol decreases as nicotine concentration increases. Conversely, perceived sweetness improved liking. An increase in the concentration of cherry flavoring did not appear to impact any of the measured attributes to a significant degree. Implications This work demonstrates that the perception of specific sensory attributes of e-cigarettes and their overall appeal are affected by the e-liquid constituents. Most significantly, the results suggest that nicotine decreases the sensory appeal of e-cigarettes by contributing to the perceived irritation and bitterness of the aerosol. These data have implications for the role that nicotine plays in the sensory perception and appeal of e-cigarettes aerosol and further how these sensory factors can be modulated by sweet flavoring.

Studies have reported that some animals, including humans, can taste mixtures of glucose oligomers (i.e., maltooligosaccharides, MOS) and that their detection is independent of the known T1R2/T1R3 sweet taste receptor. In an effort to understand potential mechanisms underlying the taste perception of glucose oligomers in humans, this study was designed to investigate: 1) the variability of taste sensitivity to MOS with low degree-of-polymerization (DP), and 2) the potential role of hT1R2/T1R3 in the MOS taste detection. To address these objectives, a series of food grade, narrow-DP-range MOS were first prepared (DP 3, 3–4, 5–6, and 6–7) by fractionating disperse saccharide mixtures. Subjects were then asked to discriminate these MOS stimuli as well as glucose (DP 1) and maltose (DP 2) from blanks after the stimuli were swabbed on the tongue. All stimuli were presented at 75 mM with and without a sweet taste inhibitor (lactisole). An α-glucosidase inhibitor (acarbose) was added to all test stimuli to prevent oral digestion of glucose oligomers. Results showed that all six stimuli were detected with similar discriminability in normal tasting conditions. When the sweet receptor was inhibited, DP 1, 2, and 3 were not discriminated from blanks. In contrast, three higher-DP paired MOS stimuli (DP 3–4, 5–6, and 6–7) were discriminated from blanks at a similar degree. Overall, these results support the presence of a sweet-independent taste perception mechanism that is stimulated by MOS greater than three units.

No abstract

Previous studies have shown that there are differences in taste responses between various regions of the tongue. Most of those studies used a controlled "passive" tasting mode due to the nature of investigation. However, food is rarely tasted in a passive manner. In addition, recent studies have suggested that humans can taste maltooligosaccharides (MOS) and that the gustatory detection of MOS is independent of the known sweet receptor. It is unknown whether regional differences in responsiveness to MOS exist. This study was set up to revisit previous work by investigating the effects of tasting mode ("passive" vs. "active") on regional differences in taste responsiveness to sucrose, monopotassium glutamate (MPG), and quinine, while also investigating potential regional differences in responsiveness to MOS. The stimuli were applied to 1 of 4 target areas, the left and right sides of the front and back of the tongue, using cotton-tipped swabs. In the passive tasting condition, the front of the tongue was found to be more responsive to both sucrose and MOS, but no regional differences were seen for quinine and MPG. In contrast, in the active tasting condition, the back of the tongue was found to be more responsive to quinine and MPG, but no differences were found for sucrose or MOS. These findings indicate that there are regional differences in taste responsiveness between the front and back of the tongue and that regional responsiveness is dependent on stimulus and tasting mode.

No abstract