News Article: Your Odor: Unique as Fingerprints
Original Paper: Genetically-Based Olfactory Signature Persist Despite Dietary Variation
Link to Original Research Paper
Even if you change your diet, everyone has a special scent that they can’t shake. Both humans and mice have olfactory nametags that are genetically unique to each individual. The news article discussed how the unique odor of an individual, found in sweat or urine, may be a scent that can not be altered by dietary changes. With this scent, new technology can be created to use these unique odors as nametags.
1) In the news study, Strange News, the article states that “Mammals such as mice and humans are known to have unique, genetically determined body odors, called odortypes, which act something like olfactory nametags,” which means that as a young lady I have a special scent and my own special scent, regardless if I change my diet or put on perfume. Odortype information is sent out through body fluids like sweat and urine. Sweat and urine have these odortypes mixed into them because they contain airborne chemical molecules known as volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The type of food that an animal or person consumes can effect they’re body odor, but this is in large moderation and doesn’t completely alter the unique scent that they have. Based on research with lab mice, “genetically determined odortypes persisted regardless of what the mice ate.” So it didn’t matter what diet the mice ate, the underlying odortypes were still very present enough to detect.
2) The original authors in the PlosOne journal concluded that there are, in fact, social animals such as mice; show that diet affects the odortype of the individual. In the study done with chemically altered mice and trained mice (used to detect the MHC) it showed that MHC can be detected even if the individual’s diet changes; no matter what the specimen eats, their MHC can still be recognized.
3) I think that the original paper clearly describes the degree of confidence. Within the last few paragraphs of the Discussion section, the authors are confident that from the findings of this experiment they can create a detector able to recognize the odortype of individuals. Because the results are consistent with their hypothesis, authors infer that they can “provide a robust alternative method to identify individuals.” The article Unique as a Fingerprint, also discusses the confidence of the journal. Monell Chemical Senses Center chemist, Jae Kwak, believes that using odor as a key tool for identification can bring the world to new possibilities. Gary Beauchamp, a biologist in Monell also believes that with this new technology, innovative research could lead to “electronic sensors for early detection and rapid diagnosis of disorders such as skin and lung cancer and certain viral diseases.”
4) The discussion in the news article online does hint at broader implications of the study done with mice. Because mice are social animals, like humans, the article looks to find how humans can benefit from odortype detection technology. This broad implication can do wonders for criminal investigations and other crime-solving organizations. As a reader, I think that this implication definitely does follow from the conclusions of the originals study done. During crime investigations and drug busts, there are odor-sniffing dogs that are trained to find some sort of scent. Because mice were chemically and manually trained to detect MHC odor profile, it shows that we are not far off from advancing the technology that we already have.
5) In the original journal, the main concern was that fluctuations in diet due to stress or other dietary changes would make the odortypes much harder to detect. In the news article, this concern was lightly touched upon. The news article did state an aspect of a previous hypothesis, saying “the type of food an animal or person eats can influence their body odor,” but it doesn’t go on to explain why. I don’t think that the news article clearly showed that the study done rejected the previous hypothesis.
6) After reading the article, it seems as though the news article does not discuss alternative hypotheses. I say this because the news article seems to be a general summary of the original article, in layman’s terms. The article briefly touches on the idea that odortypes detected on mice, can be similarly detected on humans, regardless of their diet. It speaks a lot about the MHC odortype gene that would allow scientists to further broaden the information behind this break through.