Human Pheromones in Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology

Articles published in Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology are Open Access. They are available for free in the following formats: PDF HTML EPUB XML

Each published article represents rapid movement towards a paradigm shift with regard to understanding the development of behavior. For example see:

Human pheromones and food odors: epigenetic influences on the socioaffective nature of evolved behaviors by James V. Kohl (Published: 15 March 2012) Citation: Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology 2012, 2: 17338 – DOI: 10.3402/snp.v2i0.17338

Background: Olfactory cues directly link the environment to gene expression. Two types of olfactory cues, food odors and social odors, alter genetically predisposed hormone-mediated activity in the mammalian brain. Methods: The honeybee is a model organism for understanding the epigenetic link from food odors and social odors to neural networks of the mammalian brain, which ultimately determine human behavior. Results: Pertinent aspects that extend the honeybee model to human behavior include bottom-up followed by top-down gene, cell, tissue, organ, organ-system, and organism reciprocity; neurophysiological effects of food odors and of sexually dimorphic, species-specific social odors; a model of motor function required for social selection that precedes sexual selection; and hormonal effects that link current neuroscience to social science affects on the development of animal behavior. Conclusion: As the psychological influence of food odors and social orders is examined in detail, the socioaffective nature of olfactory cues on the biologically based development of sexual preferences across all species that sexually reproduce becomes clearer

Author’s synopsis:  Nutient chemicals calibrate individual survival and are metabolized to pheromones that standardize and control survival of species from microbes to man. The direct effect of food odors and pheromones on intracellular signaling and stochastic gene expression makes chemical cues as important to the understanding of human behavior as they are to the understanding of behavior in every other species on the planet. This is especially true for placental mammals with behavior that is genetically predisposed by maternal-fetal chemical exchanges, which influence sex differences in brain development. The study of behavior must include the study of sex differences in brain development. (more…)

A fear of pheromones (revisited)

Is 40 years too long to be afraid of human pheromones?

“I should think we might fairly gauge the future of biological science, centuries ahead by estimating the time it will take to reach a complete comprehensive understanding of odor. It may not seem a profound enough problem to dominate all the life sciences, but it contains, piece by piece, all the mysteries.” Lewis Thomas (Thomas, 1980) as quoted in (Kohl & Francoeur, 1995; 2002, p. 24). See also “A Fear of Pheromones” (Thomas, 1971).

In a series of 3 experiments researchers have shown an interaction of male axillary odor with fragrance that suggests the fragrance makes human body odor more attractive. Although the exact mechanism of this interaction is not known, fragrances seem to enhance sexual attractiveness and they may effectively modulate sexual arousal and mood response of women, especially when women are in the ovulatory phase of their cycle. Also odor cues are of most importance to women in the context of partner choice and women prefer the odor of psychologically dominant men (see for review Lenochova et al., 2012)

Androstenes, like androstadienone, are chemical constituents of human axillary sweat that affect the mood, physiology and social perception of heterosexual women in both laboratory and semi-realistic settings (Berglund, Lindstrum, & Savic, 2006; Havlicek, Murray, Saxton, & Roberts, 2010; Saxton, Lyndon, Little, & Roberts, 2008). Androstenol affects levels of luteinizing hormone and mood (Preti, Wysocki, Barnhart, Sondheimer, & Leyden, 2003; Shinohara, Morofushi, Funabashi, & Kimura, 2001; Shinohara, Morofushi, Funabashi, Mitsushima, & Kimura, 2000). Androsterone is one of two primary metabolites of dehydroepiandrosterone, which is found in much higher amounts in humans than in other primates and has been linked to testosterone levels and reproductive fitness in athletes participating in competitive sports (Kohl, 2007).

Unlike androstadienone or any other androstene, the mixture of androstenol and androsterone has been shown to cause changes in women’s flirtatious behavior and in their self-reported level of attraction to the man wearing the mixture (Kohl, Kelahan & Hoffmann, unpublished). The molecular mechanisms of this interaction, which apparently involve the effect of androstenol on hormones and the affect of androsterone on behavior, are well-known across species and are modeled in: Human pheromones and food odors: epigenetic influences on the socioaffective nature of evolved behaviors.

References:

Berglund, H., Lindstrum, P., & Savic, I. (2006). Brain response to putative pheromones in lesbian women. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(21), 8269-8274.

Havlicek, J., Murray, A. K., Saxton, T. K., & Roberts, S. C. (2010). Current Issues in the Study of Androstenes in Human Chemosignaling. In G. Litwack (Ed.), Vitamins & Hormones (Vol. Volume 83, pp. 47-81): Academic Press.

Kohl, J. V. (2007). The Mind’s Eyes: Human pheromones, neuroscience, and male sexual preferences. In M. R. Kauth (Ed.), Handbook of the Evolution of Human Sexuality (pp. 313-369). Binghamton: Haworth Press.

Kohl, J. V., & Francoeur, R. T. (1995; 2002). The Scent of Eros: Mysteries of Odor in Human Sexuality. New York: Continuum Press; 2nd ed. Lincoln NE: iUniverse Press.

Lenochova, P., Vohnoutova, P., Roberts, S. C., Oberzaucher, E., Grammer, K., & Havlicek, J. (2012). Psychology of Fragrance Use: Perception of Individual Odor and Perfume Blends Reveals a Mechanism for Idiosyncratic Effects on Fragrance Choice. PLoS ONE, 7(3), e33810.

Preti, G., Wysocki, C. J., Barnhart, K. T., Sondheimer, S. J., & Leyden, J. J. (2003). Male axillary extracts contain pheromones that affect pulsatile secretion of luteinizing hormone and mood in women recipients. Biol Reprod., 68(6), 2107-2113. Epub 2003 Jan 2122.

Saxton, T. K., Lyndon, A., Little, A. C., & Roberts, S. C. (2008). Evidence that androstadienone, a putative human chemosignal, modulates women’s attributions of men’s attractiveness. Horm Behav, 14, 14.

Shinohara, K., Morofushi, M., Funabashi, T., & Kimura, F. (2001). Axillary pheromones modulate pulsatile LH secretion in humans. Neuroreport., 12(5), 893-895.

Shinohara, K., Morofushi, M., Funabashi, T., Mitsushima, D., & Kimura, F. (2000). Effects of 5alpha-androst-16-en-3alpha-ol on the pulsatile secretion of luteinizing hormone in human females. Chem Senses., 25(4), 465-467.

Thomas, L. (1971). A Fear of Pheromones. New England Journal of Medicine, 285(7), 392-393.

Thomas, L. (1980). On Smell. New England Journal of Medicine, 302(13), 731-733.

A fallacious leap? Ancestral and derived traits

So far, I don’t think anyone has read my latest publication in its entirety, before commenting on what they think I don’t know or understand. After reading little more than 7 pages (10 with references), it should become clearer that I have simply incorporated the basic principles of biology and levels of biological organization required to link sensory cause and effect across species. See for example:  Feedback loops link odor and pheromone signaling with reproduction.

Nevertheless, a correspondent says I am making a fallacious leap from what is known about the ancestral state of odor-guided behavior in microbes to explanations of current state-dependent behaviors of other organisms. He argues that just because olfaction is an ancestral trait doesn’t mean all species use it. Different creatures may have derived other sensory modalities to navigate their social and non social environments. Thus, the notion of “ancestral” and “derived” traits may be central to understanding the evolution of behavior…or anything else.

I enjoy incorporating concepts that others think I don’t understand into responses that reflect my understanding – as I hope will be the case with the notion of ancestral and derived traits. Although I cannot force anyone to read my works, I remain hopeful that those who challenge me on the basis of their notions/assumptions will first learn what I know about the concepts they think they understand.

To those who first read my most recent work, it should also become clearer that a “fallacious leap” can be found in attempts by others to link the spectral senses directly to mammalian reproduction with no consideration either for evolved bottom-up organization or for top-down effects on the required gene, cell, tissue, organ, organ system pathway. For example, there is no scientific support for any derived notion/assumption that spectral input is involved in “…an ancestral recognition system that discriminates between self and non-self (whose function is expected to have been in sexual selection) was incorporated into the quality-control system for an evolutionary new discrimination system (using randomized receptor specificities) while retaining a function in sexual selection.” Simply put, self and non-self recognition is required for receptor mediated events in sexual selection and there is no ancestral need for input from the spectral senses.

In contrast, with the full scientific support of others, I offer the honeybee as a model organism that links the ancestral recognition system of microbes to the study of this derived “quality-control system” in the evolution of epigenetically altered receptor-mediated events in human immunity, disease resistance, allergic reaction, circadian rhythms, antibiotic resistance, the development of the brain and behavior, mental health, longevity, diseases of the X chromosome, learning and memory, as well as conditioned responses to sensory stimuli.

If my focus on the ancestral olfactory/pheromonal calibration, standardization, and the derived “quality-control system” of species-specific behaviors has caused me to miss something about the notion of “ancestral” and “derived” traits that is important to the evolution of human behavior, I will need some species-specific data on the derived relative incentive salience of spectral input compared to its ancestral role. Until then, I see the involvement of the spectral senses only as an adjunct in the context of understanding the evolution of reproductive sexual behavior…or anything else.

As I’ve already repeatedly indicated, claims that spectral input is more important to the evolved behavior of birds or fish continue to fall by the wayside as newer data consistently supports the ancestral olfactory/pheromonal model, which can be tracked back to its origins in brewer’s yeast, or more speculatively to its origins in other microbes where nutrient chemical-dependent calibrated reproduction is standardized and controlled by pheromones and quorum sensing.

Modeling odor processing in microbes, mice, and mankind

In Human pheromones and food odors: epigenetic influences on the socioaffective nature of evolved behaviors, I conclude that olfaction and odor receptors provide a clear evolutionary trail that can be followed from microbes to man. The representation of this evolutionary trail in my model appears to equate with a 3/19/12 report from the Stowers Institute for Medical Research about the article: “Distributed representation of chemical features and tunotopic organization of glomeruli in the mouse olfactory bulb.” As indicated in their report New model show how the brain is organized to process odor information, the difference between my model and this “new model” may lie only in across-species comparisons, and my extension of a mammalian model to man.

In my model what they call “tuning” equates with the effects of nutrient chemicals that “calibrate” the survival of individual organisms. This “calibration” is followed by the effects of pheromones that “standardize” and “control” speciation. Thus, two different types of chemical stimuli are directly linked both to intracellular signaling and to the stochastic gene expression that is required for de novo olfactory receptor genes.

Whether it is called tuning, calibration, control, or standardization, the direct effect of chemical stimuli on intracellular signaling and gene expression occurs as other sensory input is processed. Simply put, cause and effect are directly linked to chemical stimuli and gene expression at the same time other sensory input is processed. Responses to other sensory input from the environment are conditioned to occur via the direct effect of nutrient chemicals and pheromones on intracellular signaling and gene expression.

The molecular basis of learning and memory is a secondary underlying theme of my model. In mammals, for example,  food odors, pheromones, and movement/exercise have been linked to intracellular signaling and stochastic gene expression in neurosecretory cells of brain tissue, and to luteinizing hormone and hippocampal neurogenesis. For additional information on the role of conditioning, learning, and memory see Woodson, 2012). It is important to note that conditioning, learning, and memory occur without other sensory input in organisms with no olfactory bulbs, ears, or eyes. And, it is this “tuning” that allows for the evolution of species with olfactory bulbs, ears, and eyes.

When it comes to whatever behavior they attempt to explain, those who have no model for the evolution of different species may equate the importance of visual or auditory input with the importance of olfactory/pheromonal input. But there is no mammalian model for the evolution of human behavior that does not first need to consider the effects of food odors and pheromones on hormones. In this context we can forget the analogies, metaphors, definitions, and allegorical representations. Clearly the focus must be on evolution’s sensory drive: olfaction. Those who would rather make everything about the development of human sexual behavior seem to depend on visual and auditory input should first be asked: “Is there a model for that?”

Love is a receptor-mediated event: the pervasive influence of the late Robert L. Moss

The Common Neural Bases Between Sexual Desire and Love: A Multilevel Kernel Density fMRI Analysis by Cacioppo S, Bianchi-Demicheli F, Frum C, Pfaus JG, and Lewis JW Journal of Sexual Medicine 2012.

Given what appears to be previous work with JT Cacioppo, this work by S. Cacioppo et al.,  may be the clearest indication to date that love is a receptor-mediated event. If so, it’s attribution to humans is consistent with what is known about the requirement for gene activation by sensory input directly linked to neuroendocrine responses that have their origins in the evolution of the hypothalamus. That would help explain why love is difficult to quantify, and only somewhat easier to image. It might also explain brain imagery linked to sexual orientation.

Love and sexual desire are aspects of human behavior that seem most likely to be based on a lifetime of receptor-mediated events linked to genetic predispositions and sensory input from our environment. This links them to behaviors of non-human animals. Two decades of increasing focus on genes, steroid hormones, and visually perceived physical features seems to have clouded perspectives on epigenetic influences and receptor-mediated events that begin with ligand-receptor binding and the effects of GnRH pulsatility on other hormones that affect behavior.

Epigenetic effects of pheromones: A chronology

1991; A seminal work detailed the most likely role of gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) in human sexual behavior. (Moss, Dudley, & Riskind, 1991).

1995; The role of pheromones across species and in human behavior was suggested in a book for a general audience (Kohl & Francoeur, 1995; 2002).

1996; The interactions among pheromones, molecular epigenetics, and GnRH during the development of adult sexual behavior was modeled (Diamond, Binstock, & Kohl, 1996).

2001; The unconscious affect of pheromones on GnRH on the development of heterosexual preferences in mammals was described (Kohl, Atzmueller, Fink, & Grammer, 2001).

2005; The effect of pheromones on GnRH was linked directly to control of sexual behavior (Boehm, Zou, & Buck, 2005).

2007;  The evolution of the neurophysiological mechanisms in mammals that allow the receptor-mediated effect of pheromones on GnRH to control the development of homosexual male preferences in humans was described (Kohl, 2007).

2012; The molecular biology of how nutrient chemicals calibrate the survival of individuals and how the metabolism of nutrients to pheromones that standardizes and controls species survival appears to link the nature and nurture of receptor-mediated behavioral development across species (Kohl, in press).

Comments: Two decades of scientific progress since GnRH was first linked to human sexual behavior have failed to convince some researchers of what should have long ago become known and accepted. Namely, that nutrient chemicals and pheromones are directly responsible for the evolved behaviors of all species. Those who profess that other sensory input from the environment is more important to behavioral development should be asked for scientific evidence that supports their opinions about the basic principles of biology and levels of biological organization required to link cause and effect. When no support is found for their concept of how behavior develops, these professors should be asked to learn about the molecular biology of behavior that is common to all species. It is molecular biology that links nutrient chemicals and pheromones to behavior in species from microbes to man.

Bibliography

Boehm, U., Zou, Z., & Buck, L. B. (2005). Feedback loops link odor and pheromone signaling with reproduction. Cell, 123(4), 683-695.

Diamond, M., Binstock, T., & Kohl, J. V. (1996). From fertilization to adult sexual behavior. Horm Behav, 30(4), 333-353.

Kohl, J. V. (2007). The Mind’s Eyes: Human pheromones, neuroscience, and male sexual preferences. In M. R. Kauth (Ed.), Handbook of the Evolution of Human Sexuality (pp. 313-369). Binghamton: Haworth Press.

Kohl, J. V. (in press). Human pheromones and food odors: Epigenetic influences on the socioaffective nature of evolved behaviors. Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology.

Kohl, J. V., Atzmueller, M., Fink, B., & Grammer, K. (2001). Human pheromones: integrating neuroendocrinology and ethology. Neuro Endocrinol Lett, 22(5), 309-321.

Kohl, J. V., & Francoeur, R. T. (1995; 2002). The Scent of Eros: Mysteries of Odor in Human Sexuality. New York: Continuum Press; 2nd ed. Lincoln NE: iUniverse Press.

Moss, R. L., Dudley, C. A., & Riskind, P. N. (1991). Gonadotropin releasing hormone and human sexual behavior. In C. B. Nemeroff (Ed.), Neuropeptides and Psychiatric Disorders. Washington, D.C: American Psychiatric Press.

They are what they eat, and so are we

From Science NOW

To Boldly Go Where No Bee Has Gone

by Helen Fields on 8 March 2012, 2:40 PM

Excerpt: “A new study examines scouts’ brains and finds that novelty-seeking in humans and bees seems to be based on some of the same genes.

My comment: It’s becoming more difficult for me to keep up with advances like this because they are coming so rapidly. Earlier today, for example, I noticed an article indicating conservation of gonadotropin releasing hormone across insects, which helps to establish an evolutionary continuum from microbes to man. But this article on bees is central to the continuum, so I attempted to add my comments (pending approval) to the Science Magazine site. Typically, I would wait to read these articles in their entirety, but I have no time to do this right now.

————————-

What the queen eats metabolizes to pheromones that determine everything involved in the behavior of the colony, including the neuroanatomy of worker bee brains. Does this new evidence suggest that what the scouts eat determines neurotransmission and receptor content in brain tissue? If so, this might best exemplify nutrient-dependent calibration of individual survival, and pheromone-driven standardization and control of speciation from microbes to man. In mammals, for example, we see nutrient-dependent luteinizing hormone (LH) – driven steroidogenesis linked to species specific pheromone production. And the pheromones control gonadotropin releasing hormone secretion and steroidogenesis in well-nourished conspecifics. This reciprocity is responsible for properly timed reproductive sexual behavior that depends on proper food choice and mate choice. Epigenetic effects of nutrient chemicals and pheromones that can be measured in assays of LH in mammals attest to the common molecular biology of species from insects to mammals, but also from microbes to man because a form of GnRH is the alpha mating pheromone of brewer’s yeast. The honeybee already serves as a model organism for studying human immunity, disease resistance, allergic reaction, circadian rhythms, antibiotic resistance, the development of the brain and behavior, mental health, longevity, diseases of the X chromosome, learning and memory, as well as conditioned responses to sensory stimuli (e.g., food odors and social odors). Shall we use the honeybee as a model for the epigenetic effects of olfactory/pheromonal input across species from microbes to man?

Pheromones and the “Bruce effect” in wild or domesticated horses and primates

Subscription required to read full report from Science: A Bruce Effect in Wild Geladas

Abstract: Female rodents are known to terminate pregnancies after exposure to unfamiliar males (“Bruce effect”). Although laboratory support abounds, direct evidence for a Bruce effect under natural conditions is lacking. Here, we report a strong Bruce effect in a wild primate, the gelada (Theropithecus gelada). Female geladas terminate 80% of pregnancies in the weeks after a dominant male is replaced. Further, data on interbirth intervals suggest that pregnancy termination offers fitness benefits for females whose offspring would otherwise be susceptible to infanticide. Taken together, data support the hypothesis that the Bruce effect can be an adaptive strategy for females.

My comments on the article can be read at the site linked above and here:

(Kotitschke et al, 2009) provided evidence for “…a novel mechanism of rapid nongenomic cross talk between the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axes via GnRHR-dependent phosphorylation and activation of the unliganded GR in response to GnRH.”

The epigenetic effect of mammalian pheromones on GnRH neurosecretory neurons (e.g., as indicated by c-fos expression) and thereby on glucocorticoid receptors seems consistent with effects of pheromones on both the neuroendocrine and neuroimmune system. This molecular epigenetic effect on regulation of sexual reproduction also is indicated across an evolutionary continuum beginning in species of yeast that incorporate a form of mammalian GnRH into a self vs. non-self recognition mechanism involving an “alpha mating pheromone” linked to their “sexual orientation”(Diamond et al,1996).

Nothing that I know about molecular biology indicates that epigenetic effects of non-olfactory/pheromonal stimuli directly impact the HPA axis or HPG axis of mammals, or that visual input plays a primary role in the sexual behavior of any species from microbes to man. Is it not clear that mammalian pheromones are responsible for the “Bruce effect” in lab rats and in wild or domesticated horses and primates, and that pheromones also condition the hormone responses associated with visual input and secondary-process learning and memory mechanisms, which sometimes interface with tertiary-process cognitive-thoughtful functions and behavior in some humans? (more…)

Exercise Alters Epigenetics

Exercise causes short-term changes in DNA methylation and gene expression in muscle tissue that may have implications for type 2 diabetes.

from The Scientist News & Opinion

Excerpt: “This shows that there is some molecular evidence to support that notion that exercise is a medicine,” Zierath added.

My comment:

The common molecular biology across vertebrate species suggests that the epigenetic effects either of movement, or of exercise, on gene expression is due to the same mechanisms I have detailed in the context of the gene, cell, tissue, organ, organ system pathway (in accord with the FDA Critical Path Initiative and ASAM policy statement on addiction). This pathway links sensory input from the environment directly to gene activation and behavior. In mammals, for example, it is the gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) neuronal system that is primarily responsible for the epigenetic effects of nutrient chemicals and species-specific pheromones on intracellular signaling and stochastic gene expression in brain tissue responsible for movement. (more…)

Pheromones: from microbes to man

Pheromones.com will sponsor this game because it appears to be a fun way for non-scientists and scientists alike to learn about the gene, cell, tissue, organ, organ system pathway that links sensory input to the development of behavior in species from microbes to man.  Biologically based cause and effect starts with the primacy of nutrient chemicals that are metabolized by bacteria to species specific pheromones, which are determinants of reproduction. Nutrition and pheromones are essential to individual survival and species survival in all species.  Could the next generation begin to better understand our species survival by playing “Bacillus”?

How memory works

A Conversation With Eric R. Kandel

A Quest to Understand How Memory Works

Excerpt: “…long-term memory alters the expression of genes in nerve cells, which is the cause of the growth of new synaptic connections. When you see that at the cellular level, you realize that the brain can change because of experience. It gives you a different feeling about how nature and nurture interact. They are not separate processes.”

My comment:
Sensory input links nurture (the social environment) to nature (genetic predisposition). In mammals it does this via direct effects of sensory input on genes in hormone-secreting nerve cells of the brain. Food odors and social odors called pheromones directly effect genes in nerve cells of brain tissue that secretes gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH). Understanding the evolution of the pathways that effect changes in the mammalian GnRH neuronal system and GnRH secretion is the key to understanding the basic principles of biology and levels of biological organization required to link nature to nurture in species from microbes to man. (more…)