Divergent taste responsiveness to fruit of the tree Antidesma bunius (original) (raw)

• Letter
• Published: 10 February 1977

Nature volume 265, pages 536–537 (1977)Cite this article

• 357 Accesses
• 13 Citations
• 6 Altmetric
• Metrics details

Abstract

GENETIC divergence of taste responsiveness was first demonstrated for phenylthiocarbamide (PTC)1, the inability to taste PTC bitter being described as an inherited Mendelian recessive character, and ability to taste PTC bitter as dominant2. This hypothesis has largely been confirmed3,4 although occasional incomplete penetrance of the ‘taster’ gene has been reported. Recently, eight people were served with a pie made from antidesma berries, and two people complained that the pie was extremely bitter and inedible. The other six people, however, found the pie pleasant tasting, enjoyably edible and sweet. This incident prompted us to survey taste responsivness to antidesma. We found that all subjects who tasted antidesma as bitter found PTC not bitter, whereas no subject who tasted PTC as bitter found antidesma bitter.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

$199.00 per year

only $3.90 per issue

Buy this article

• Purchase on SpringerLink
• Instant access to full article PDF

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Additional access options:

• Log in
• Learn about institutional subscriptions
• Read our FAQs
• Contact customer support

Similar content being viewed by others

References

1. Fox, A. L., Sci. News Lett., 19, 249 (1931).
   Google Scholar
2. Blakeslee, A. F., Proc. natn Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 21, 120–130 (1932).
   Article ADS Google Scholar
3. Das, S. R., Ann. hum. Genet., 22, 200 (1958).
   Article CAS Google Scholar
4. Beandtzaeg Merton, B., Acta Genet., 8, 114 (1958).
   Google Scholar
5. Giroux, E. L., and Henkin, R. I., Life Sci., 10, 361–370 (1971).
   Article CAS Google Scholar
6. PseudoIsochromatic Plates (Beck, Philadelphia, 1965).
7. Hartmann, G., Ann. Eugen., 9, 123–135 (1939).
   Article Google Scholar
8. Harris, H., and Kalmus, H., Ann. hum. Genetics, 10, 24–31 (1949).
   Google Scholar
9. Hoyme, E. J., Heredity, 46, 167–176 (1955).
   Article Google Scholar
10. Fairchild, D., Garden Islands of the Great East, 239 (Scribner, New York, 1943).
    Google Scholar
11. Burkill, I. H., Dictionary of the Economic Products of the Malay Peminsula (Crown Agents for the Colonies, London, 1935).
    Google Scholar
12. Fischer, R., and Griffin, F., Drug Res., 14, 673–686 (1964).
    CAS Google Scholar
13. Valenstein, E. S., Kokalewski, J. W., and Cox, V. C., Science, 146, 942–943 (1967).
    Article ADS Google Scholar
14. Hall, M. J., Bartoshuk, L. M., Cain, W. S., and Stevens, J. C., Nature, 253, 442–443 (1975).
    Article ADS CAS Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. Center for Molecular Nutrition and Sensory Disorders, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, 20007
   R. I. HENKIN
2. Department of Biology, Hope College, Holland, Michigan, 49423
   W. T. GILLIS
3. Kellogg Biological Station, Hickory Corners, Michigan
   W. T. GILLIS

Authors

1. R. I. HENKIN
   You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
2. W. T. GILLIS
   You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

HENKIN, R., GILLIS, W. Divergent taste responsiveness to fruit of the tree Antidesma bunius.Nature 265, 536–537 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1038/265536a0

Download citation

• Received: 18 October 1976
• Accepted: 14 December 1976
• Issue Date: 10 February 1977
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/265536a0

This article is cited by