Skip to main content
  • Submit
  • About
    • Editorial Board
    • PNAS Staff
    • FAQ
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Site Map
  • Contact
  • Journal Club
  • Subscribe
    • Subscription Rates
    • Subscriptions FAQ
    • Open Access
    • Recommend PNAS to Your Librarian
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Latest Articles
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • Archive
  • Front Matter
  • News
    • For the Press
    • Highlights from Latest Articles
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Purpose and Scope
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • For Reviewers
    • Author FAQ
  • Submit
  • About
    • Editorial Board
    • PNAS Staff
    • FAQ
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Site Map
  • Contact
  • Journal Club
  • Subscribe
    • Subscription Rates
    • Subscriptions FAQ
    • Open Access
    • Recommend PNAS to Your Librarian

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Home
Home

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Latest Articles
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • Archive
  • Front Matter
  • News
    • For the Press
    • Highlights from Latest Articles
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Purpose and Scope
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • For Reviewers
    • Author FAQ

New Research In

Physical Sciences

Featured Portals

  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Sustainability Science

Articles by Topic

  • Applied Mathematics
  • Applied Physical Sciences
  • Astronomy
  • Computer Sciences
  • Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences
  • Engineering
  • Environmental Sciences
  • Mathematics
  • Statistics

Social Sciences

Featured Portals

  • Anthropology
  • Sustainability Science

Articles by Topic

  • Economic Sciences
  • Environmental Sciences
  • Political Sciences
  • Psychological and Cognitive Sciences
  • Social Sciences

Biological Sciences

Featured Portals

  • Sustainability Science

Articles by Topic

  • Agricultural Sciences
  • Anthropology
  • Applied Biological Sciences
  • Biochemistry
  • Biophysics and Computational Biology
  • Cell Biology
  • Developmental Biology
  • Ecology
  • Environmental Sciences
  • Evolution
  • Genetics
  • Immunology and Inflammation
  • Medical Sciences
  • Microbiology
  • Neuroscience
  • Pharmacology
  • Physiology
  • Plant Biology
  • Population Biology
  • Psychological and Cognitive Sciences
  • Sustainability Science
  • Systems Biology

Detection of sickness in conspecifics using olfactory and visual cues

Camille Ferdenzi, Carmen Licon, and Moustafa Bensafi
PNAS June 13, 2017 114 (24) 6157-6159; published ahead of print June 5, 2017 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1707139114
Camille Ferdenzi
aCNRS, UMR5292, Lyon Neuroscience Research Center, University of Lyon, F-69000 Lyon, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Carmen Licon
aCNRS, UMR5292, Lyon Neuroscience Research Center, University of Lyon, F-69000 Lyon, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Moustafa Bensafi
aCNRS, UMR5292, Lyon Neuroscience Research Center, University of Lyon, F-69000 Lyon, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: moustafa.bensafi@cnrs.fr

See related content:

  • Behavioral and neural correlates to multisensory detection of sick humans
    - Jun 13, 2017
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Social Communication in Humans

Social communication in humans, although largely based on sophisticated language skills, is also substantially mediated by nonverbal cues that the receiver perceives through his/her senses. It is largely acknowledged that humans are highly visual organisms and that their perception of the social and physical environment is dominated by vision. In the field of person perception (i.e., how we process information about people), an enormous research effort has been dedicated in particular to the understanding of face perception (1) and how information, such as the individual’s emotional state or quality as a mate, can be conveyed through facial features (color, shape, expression, etc.). However, other sensory channels have more recently been revealed as highly pertinent: the auditory channel [through the voice (2)] and the olfactory channel. Although olfaction has long been a neglected sense in humans (3), there is now convincing evidence that humans are efficient in using it (4) and able to extract relevant cues conveyed by smells, and respond to them in an adaptive manner. For example, several experiments using “fear sweat” (body odor produced by donors experiencing fear) revealed emotional contagion in the receiver (5). Alarm is one of the major functions of olfaction (6), with obvious survival relevance. In the food domain, olfactory cues allow us to avoid the deadly threat of ingesting spoiled food. In the social context, threat detection through smell can, for example, materialize in the recognition of infected status. The medical community has been using olfactory cues in diagnoses for centuries (7), and dogs have the ability to recognize sick individuals by smell (8, 9). However, the mechanisms of disease avoidance through smell in humans remain at present poorly explored or understood, in terms of both the nature of the chemicals produced by the healthy or sick individual and the expression and cerebral representation of the perception of such highly relevant olfactory cues. The article in PNAS by Regenbogen et al. (10), by tackling the latter issue, is therefore a pioneer in this area.

Sickness Communicated Through Olfaction and Vision

The first question asked in this study was how humans perceive early sickness cues of conspecifics sampled just hours after the induction of immune system activation. The second question concerned the neural mechanisms involved in the detection of these sickness cues. To address these questions, the authors conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled study in which the immune system was transiently activated in 22 individuals (referred to as “donors”) with an injection of lipopolysaccharide (LPS; an endotoxin). Facial photographs and body odor samples were taken from the same donors when “sick” (after LPS injection) and when “healthy” (after saline injection). These visual and olfactory stimuli were then presented to a new sample of 30 naive participants in a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study in which their neural responses to faces and body odors were measured. Here, sick and healthy facial stimuli, displayed on a computer screen, were presented paired with either sick or healthy body odors, or with a control olfactory condition; olfactory stimuli were diffused by an olfactometer. During fMRI scanning, participants rated their liking of the person depicted in the facial visual stimulus. After the fMRI session, they were also asked to rate stimuli along various dimensions: intensity, pleasantness, and healthiness (for odors) as well as attractiveness, healthiness, and desired social interaction (for faces).

Regenbogen et al. (10) show that liking behavior toward another person was modulated by activation of the immune system, in that sick faces were less liked, and were judged less attractive, healthy, or socially desirable than healthy faces. Moreover, faces associated with sick body odors were less liked than faces paired with the control olfactory condition. Such perceptual changes were associated with neural modulation: “Visual sickness” (perception of sick faces in comparison to healthy faces) induced activations mainly in secondary brain areas: middle and superior frontal gyrus, posterior insula, and middle cingulate cortex. Note that when visual and olfactory cues of sickness were combined, significant functional connectivity was shown between a set of brain regions (inferior parietal sulcus and temporal cortices, inferior parietal lobe, cingulate cortices, precuneus, primary visual cortex, and fusiform cortex), indicating the existence of an amodal neural network extracting sickness cues.

When olfactory stimuli were considered alone, because body odors were relatively weak in intensity, no clear perceptual differences were observed between sick and healthy body odors. Despite this absence of perceptual difference, neural activations by “olfactory sickness” were seen: In contrast to visual sickness, olfactory sickness enhanced activity in both primary and secondary areas (entorhinal/piriform cortex, orbitofrontal cortex, inferior frontopolar gyrus, middle frontal gyrus, and thalamus). The fact that such a neural network was activated for smells perceived as weak in intensity and difficult to discriminate raised the question of whether neural extraction of olfactory sickness is mediated by nonconscious processes. In line with this hypothesis, a series of previous reports indicated that olfactory stimuli can influence nervous system activity and behavior without being consciously detected (11, 12). The activation observed in the thalamus in particular could be explored in greater depth in future studies, because previous work suggests its involvement in attention to olfactory stimuli (13).

In all, Regenbogen et al.’s work (10) shows that the odor of a sick versus healthy body triggers differentiated cerebral responses in the recipient: This finding clearly raises the question of the nature of human body odor, its variations, and its signaling function. The chemical composition of skin odors is not yet fully known, and methods of sampling (14) and of chemical analysis are subject to debate (15). Research on the role of body odor in social interaction, not only in disease avoidance but also in human attractiveness and mate choice, suffers from these shortcomings. For example, more or less only a single family of compounds (androstenes) has been the focus (16) of attempts to identify human (sex-related) pheromones, whereas body odor is made up of hundreds of other possibly relevant compounds that clearly deserve our attention but are neglected because of lack of knowledge. With currently developing techniques in analytical chemistry, the challenge of developing our knowledge of the nature of human body odor, and thus of its signaling function, may possibly be met in the near future.

Future Directions

In this perspective, future neuroscientific studies could benefit from experience gained in the field of food science. Humans use multiple sensory channels to detect and avoid potential threats present in food by being able to distinguish even small changes in organoleptic properties. For instance, changes in meat color from pink to brown or in fruit texture from moist to dry may indicate that the food is no longer edible or that it could represent a threat if eaten. Likewise, the olfactory channel enables detection of small changes in the concentration of certain volatile compounds. For example, the presence of some aldehydes (specifically hexanal) suggests fat oxidation in meat and oil (17), and the presence of trimethylamine is an indicator of decay in fish (18). In all, the study of human chemical communication has everything to gain from drawing methodological inspiration from studies in food sciences, where a large number of olfactory compounds have already been isolated.

The contribution by Regenbogen et al. is an important one in the field of nonverbal social communication. It especially highlights, for the first time, that olfactory and visual sickness cues activate specific and interacting neural networks and influence behavior toward conspecifics.

Finally, another stimulating perspective raised by Regenbogen et al.’s article (10) is to explore further the concept of relevance of olfactory (or visual) information. The notion of relevance to the receiving subject's current needs and goals is central to the formation of his/her emotional response, as postulated by the appraisal theory of emotion (19), with the amygdala being a key cerebral substrate in relevance detection processes (20). Surprisingly, despite a functional connection between the amygdala and the intraparietal sulcus during multisensory integration, no difference in amygdala activation was found on direct comparison between sick versus healthy olfactory (or visual) stimuli in Regenbogen et al.’s study (10). Given the adaptive function of the process investigated (disease avoidance) and its underlying neural mechanism, it could be worth testing samples varying in the relevance level of their sickness cues, such as patients with or without immunodeficiency (pathology- or medication-induced) or cultural groups from geographic areas differing in average pathogen level (21). Such approaches could provide a more comprehensive framework to elucidate the cerebral and behavioral processes involved in sensory-based disease avoidance.

In conclusion, the contribution by Regenbogen et al. (10) is an important one in the field of nonverbal social communication. It especially highlights, for the first time, that olfactory and visual sickness cues activate specific and interacting neural networks and influence behavior toward conspecifics. This study opens up new avenues of research in the field of sensory and cognitive influences on behavior without clear awareness, and it deserves interdisciplinary effort with other fields, such as chemistry.

Footnotes

  • ↵1To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: moustafa.bensafi{at}cnrs.fr.
  • Author contributions: C.F., C.L., and M.B. wrote the paper.

  • The authors declare no conflict of interest.

  • See companion article on page 6400.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Perrett D
    (2010) In Your Face: The New Science of Human Attraction (Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, UK).
    .
  2. ↵
    1. Latinus M,
    2. Belin P
    (2011) Human voice perception. Curr Biol 21:R143–R145.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Le Guérer A
    (2002) Olfaction and cognition: A philosophical and psychoanalytic view. Olfaction Taste and Cognition, ed Rouby C (Cambridge Univ Press, New York), pp 3–15.
    .
  4. ↵
    1. Bushdid C,
    2. Magnasco MO,
    3. Vosshall LB,
    4. Keller A
    (2014) Humans can discriminate more than 1 trillion olfactory stimuli. Science 343:1370–1372.
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    1. de Groot JHB,
    2. Smeets MAM,
    3. Kaldewaij A,
    4. Duijndam MJA,
    5. Semin GR
    (2012) Chemosignals communicate human emotions. Psychol Sci 23:1417–1424.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Stevenson RJ
    (2010) An initial evaluation of the functions of human olfaction. Chem Senses 35:3–20.
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. ↵
    1. Whittle CL,
    2. Fakharzadeh S,
    3. Eades J,
    4. Preti G
    (2007) Human breath odors and their use in diagnosis. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1098:252–266.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Hardin DS,
    2. Anderson W,
    3. Cattet J
    (2015) Dogs can be successfully trained to alert to hypoglycemia samples from patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Ther 6:509–517.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Willis CM,
    2. Britton LE,
    3. Harris R,
    4. Wallace J,
    5. Guest CM
    (2010-2011) Volatile organic compounds as biomarkers of bladder cancer: Sensitivity and specificity using trained sniffer dogs. Cancer Biomark 8:145–153.
    .
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. Regenbogen C, et al.
    (2017) Behavioral and neural correlates to multisensory detection of sick humans. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 114:6400–6405.
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. ↵
    1. Li W,
    2. Moallem I,
    3. Paller KA,
    4. Gottfried JA
    (2007) Subliminal smells can guide social preferences. Psychol Sci 18:1044–1049.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Lorig TS
    (1994) EEG and ERP studies of low-level odor exposure in normal subjects. Toxicol Ind Health 10:579–586.
    .
    OpenUrlPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Courtiol E,
    2. Wilson DA
    (2015) The olfactory thalamus: Unanswered questions about the role of the mediodorsal thalamic nucleus in olfaction. Front Neural Circuits 9:49.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Dormont L,
    2. Bessière J-M,
    3. Cohuet A
    (2013) Human skin volatiles: A review. J Chem Ecol 39:569–578.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Curran AM,
    2. Rabin SI,
    3. Prada PA,
    4. Furton KG
    (2006) On the definition and measurement of human scent: Response by Curran et al. J Chem Ecol 32:1617–1623.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  16. ↵
    1. Wyatt TD
    (2015) The search for human pheromones: The lost decades and the necessity of returning to first principles. Proc Biol Sci 282:20142994.
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. ↵
    1. Andrés A,
    2. Cava R,
    3. Ventanas J,
    4. Muriel E,
    5. Ruiz J
    (2004) Lipid oxidative changes throughout the ripening of dry-cured Iberian hams with different salt contents and processing conditions. Food Chem 84:375–381.
    .
    OpenUrl
  18. ↵
    1. Triqui R,
    2. Bouchriti N
    (2003) Freshness assessments of Moroccan sardine (Sardina pilchardus): Comparison of overall sensory changes to instrumentally determined volatiles. J Agric Food Chem 51:7540–7546.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Sander D,
    2. Grandjean D,
    3. Scherer KR
    (2005) A systems approach to appraisal mechanisms in emotion. Neural Netw 18:317–352.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. Sander D,
    2. Grafman J,
    3. Zalla T
    (2003) The human amygdala: An evolved system for relevance detection. Rev Neurosci 14:303–316.
    .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. Dunn RR,
    2. Davies TJ,
    3. Harris NC,
    4. Gavin MC
    (2010) Global drivers of human pathogen richness and prevalence. Proc Biol Sci 277:2587–2595.
    .
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Article Alerts
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on PNAS.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Detection of sickness in conspecifics using olfactory and visual cues
(Your Name) has sent you a message from PNAS
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the PNAS web site.
Citation Tools
Olfactory and visual sickness
Camille Ferdenzi, Carmen Licon, Moustafa Bensafi
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Jun 2017, 114 (24) 6157-6159; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1707139114

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Request Permissions
Share
Olfactory and visual sickness
Camille Ferdenzi, Carmen Licon, Moustafa Bensafi
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Jun 2017, 114 (24) 6157-6159; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1707139114
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: 116 (7)
Current Issue

Submit

Sign up for Article Alerts

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Social Communication in Humans
    • Sickness Communicated Through Olfaction and Vision
    • Future Directions
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

You May Also be Interested in

Several aspects of the proposal, which aims to expand open access, require serious discussion and, in some cases, a rethink.
Opinion: “Plan S” falls short for society publishers—and for the researchers they serve
Several aspects of the proposal, which aims to expand open access, require serious discussion and, in some cases, a rethink.
Image credit: Dave Cutler (artist).
Several large or long-lived animals seem strangely resistant to developing cancer. Elucidating the reasons why could lead to promising cancer-fighting strategies in humans.
Core Concept: Solving Peto’s Paradox to better understand cancer
Several large or long-lived animals seem strangely resistant to developing cancer. Elucidating the reasons why could lead to promising cancer-fighting strategies in humans.
Image credit: Shutterstock.com/ronnybas frimages.
Featured Profile
PNAS Profile of NAS member and biochemist Hao Wu
 Nonmonogamous strawberry poison frog (Oophaga pumilio).  Image courtesy of Yusan Yang (University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh).
Putative signature of monogamy
A study suggests a putative gene-expression hallmark common to monogamous male vertebrates of some species, namely cichlid fishes, dendrobatid frogs, passeroid songbirds, common voles, and deer mice, and identifies 24 candidate genes potentially associated with monogamy.
Image courtesy of Yusan Yang (University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh).
Active lifestyles. Image courtesy of Pixabay/MabelAmber.
Meaningful life tied to healthy aging
Physical and social well-being in old age are linked to self-assessments of life worth, and a spectrum of behavioral, economic, health, and social variables may influence whether aging individuals believe they are leading meaningful lives.
Image courtesy of Pixabay/MabelAmber.

More Articles of This Classification

  • Solution to the 50-year-old Okazaki-fragment problem
  • Musical pleasure and musical emotions
  • Species coexistence through competition and rapid evolution
Show more

Related Content

  • Multisensory sickness detection
  • Scopus
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited by...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Similar Articles

Site Logo
Powered by HighWire
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • RSS Feeds
  • Email Alerts

Articles

  • Current Issue
  • Latest Articles
  • Archive

PNAS Portals

  • Classics
  • Front Matter
  • Teaching Resources
  • Anthropology
  • Chemistry
  • Physics
  • Sustainability Science

Information

  • Authors
  • Editorial Board
  • Reviewers
  • Press
  • Site Map

Feedback    Privacy/Legal

Copyright © 2019 National Academy of Sciences. Online ISSN 1091-6490