“…It should be mentioned, however, that these studies employed changes in respiration frequency and heart rate, respectively, to determine olfactory detection thresholds, and both methods are known to be less sensitive than operant conditioning procedures (Hastings, 2003). A within-species comparison between the detection threshold values of the present study with those obtained in earlier studies using the same methods and animals but with other classes of odorants such as aliphatic esters (Hernandez Salazar et al, 2003;Laska and Seibt, 2002a), alcohols (Laska and Seibt, 2002b;Laska et al, 2006a), aldehydes (Laska et al, 2003b;Laska et al, 2006a), ketones (Laska et al, 2005a), carboxylic acids , terpenes (Laska et al, 2006c), thiazoles (Laska et al, 2005b), or steroids (Laska et al, 2005c;Laska et al, 2006b) reveals that in all three species of primate at least one of the putrefaction-associated odorants employed here (indol with squirrel monkeys and pigtail macaques, ethanethiol and 3-methyl indol with the spider monkeys) yielded the lowest detection thresholds among the more than 50 odorants tested so far. This finding is in line with reports showing that human subjects are particularly sensitive to thiols and indols (van Gemert, 2003).…”