Human Pheromone Receptors and "Gender"

Pheromone Science Pheromone Theory & Molecules
1

Mitropoulos C, Papachatzopoulou A, Menounos PG, Kolonelou C, Pappa M, Bertolis G, Gerou S, Patrinos GP.
Association Study of Human VN1R1 Pheromone Receptor Gene Alleles and Gender. Genet Test. 2007 Summer;11(2):128-32.

“our data suggest that the allelic differences in the human VN1R1 gene are unlikely to be associated with gender and hence to contribute to distinct gender-specific behavior.”

Speculation: If genetic variation does not contribute to distict “gender” - specific behavior, it may be that olfactory/pheromonal conditioning of the sexual response cycle makes a bigger difference than previously realized. It would therefore make sense to anticipate that the pairing of an olfactory component with a pheromonal component in a mixture would increase product effectiveness. Next thing on the agenda would be to examine species specificity of the olfactory and the pheromonal components, as is being done by few, if any other, researchers.

James V. Kohl
http://www.pheromones.com

2

That’s a pretty strong and confident statement. Do the results hold if that is not true?

Even if receptors are identical that doesn’t imply that behavioral responses to the received stimulli are therefore identical. The eyes of men and women are presumably pretty similar, yet they respond in different manners to Playgirl Magazine.

I think your speculation generalizes the results to far. (I guess that’s why it’s speculation!) The authors seem to be speaking of genetic differences in a receptor gene. It is easy to hypothesize other genetic differences that would have effects on gender-specific behaviors.

3

Your question shows you are very perceptive. I’ve requested a reprint of the article, but may not fully understand it even when I get a copy.

The ligand (e.g., pheromone)-receptor difference is the first difference one would expect to see when examining a sex difference in the response.

Comparatively speaking: what sex difference in sensory processing allows men and women to respond with a sex difference to visual erotica?

A distinguished colleague once advised me that if I would need to find evidence of gene activation by pheromones (i.e., in cells of hormone secreting tissue of the brain), to complete my 1992 model of how human pheromones work --“Luteinizing hormone: the link between sex and the sense of smell?”

Dudley, C.A., Rajendren, G., & Moss, R.L. (1992) Induction of FOS immunoreactivity in central accessory olfactory structures of the female rat following exposure to conspecific males. Molecular and Cellular Neurosciences, 3, 360‑369.

By 1993 the distiguished colleague was convinced my model was complete.

Rajendren, G., Dudley, C.A. & Moss, R.L. (1993) Influence of male rats on the luteinizing hormone‑releasing hormone neuronal system in female rats: role of the vomeronasal organ. Neuroendocrinology, 57, 1, 898‑906.

I have not found information on gene activation occurring with exposure to non-olfactory/pheromonal sensory input (e.g., visual input) that would explain a sex difference in the response to visual erotica. But there is no absence of strong and confident statements that humans are primarily visual creatures when it comes to sexual attraction. There is also no mammalian model that supports such strong and confident statements.

I hope to learn more about how well their research holds up to scutiny. Statements about the visual appeal of other people lack biologically-based substantiation (i.e., via a gene-cell-tissue-organ-organ system pathway that links sensory input from the social environment to sex differences in behavior).

James Vaughn Kohl
http://www.pheromones.com