Search

Menu
Search
in Ecology

Human olfactory sensitivity varies across geographical locations

144 Views


Abstract

It has been assumed that olfactory sensitivity is relatively consistent in different populations worldwide. Emerging, yet fragmented evidence lends credit to the hypothesis that olfactory sensitivity may be geographically diverse. To gain deeper insight regarding the interplay between geographical, demographic, and health factors in the context of olfactory sensitivity, we conducted a multicenter study comprising data from 1046 participants inhabiting 19 locations around the world. Our results revealed that location accounted for 17–20% of the variance in chemosensory sensitivity. Demographic and psychological factors related to working memory and depressive symptoms also contribute to explaining sensitivity to odors, accounting for 1.6–2.9% of the variance in chemosensory sensitivity. Thus, we conclude that inhabitants of different geographical regions may present different sensitivities to chemical stimuli. We discuss the factors that could potentially be included in future investigations to pinpoint even more precisely what factors determine differences in chemosensory sensitivity around the globe.

Data availability

All data associated with this manuscript are publicly available: https://osf.io/m95z4/

References

  1. Stevenson, R. J. An Initial Evaluation of the Functions of Human Olfaction. Chem Senses 35, 3–20 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Firestein, S. How the olfactory system makes sense of scents. Nature 413, 211–218 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Laska, M. Human and Animal Olfactory Capabilities Compared. in Springer Handbook of Odor 81–82 (Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26932-0_32.

  4. the Romanian cultural adaptation. Catana, I., N. S., M. A., P. M., & C. M. A modified version of “Sniffin’Sticks” odor identification test. Med Pharm Rep 85, 218–223 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cavazzana, A. et al. A Cross-Cultural Adaptation of the Sniffin’ Sticks Olfactory Identification Test for US children. Chem Senses 42, 133–140 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hedner, M., Larsson, M., Arnold, N., Zucco, G. M. & Hummel, T. Cognitive factors in odor detection, odor discrimination, and odor identification tasks. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 32, 1062–1067 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Hummel, T., Sekinger, B., Wolf, S. R., Pauli, E. & Kobal, G. ‘Sniffin’ Sticks’: Olfactory Performance Assessed by the Combined Testing of Odour Identification, Odor Discrimination and Olfactory Threshold. Chem Senses 22, 39–52 (1997).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Konstantinidis, I. et al. Cultural adaptation of an olfactory identification test: the Greek version of Sniffin’ Sticks. Rhinology 46, 292–296 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Oleszkiewicz, A. et al. Development of the Arabic version of the “Sniffin’ Sticks” odor identification test. Eur. Arch. Otorhinolaryngol. 273, 1179–1184 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Sorokowska, A., Drechsler, E., Karwowski, M. & Hummel, T. Effects of olfactory training: A meta-analysis. Rhinology 55, 17–26. https://doi.org/10.4193/Rhino16.195 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Schriever, V. A. et al. Development of an International Odor Identification Test for Children: The Universal Sniff Test. J. Pediatr. 198, 265-272.e3 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ferdenzi, C., Coureaud, G., Camos, V. & Schaal, B. Human awareness and uses of odor cues in everyday life: Results from a questionnaire study in children. Int J Behav Dev 32, 422–431 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ayabe-Kanamura, S. et al. Differences in Perception of Everyday Odors: A Japanese-German Cross-Cultural Study. Chem. Senses 23 https://academic.oup.com/chemse/article/23/1/31/360599 (1998).

  14. Saxton, T. K. et al. Sex Differences in Olfactory Behavior in Namibian and Czech Children. Chemosens Percept 7, 117–125 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Seo, H. S. et al. Attitudes toward olfaction: A cross-regional study. Chem Senses 36, 177–187 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ferdenzi, C. et al. Affective dimensions of odor perception: A comparison between Swiss, British, and Singaporean populations. Emotion 11, 1168–1181 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Ferdenzi, C. et al. Variability of affective responses to odors: Culture, gender, and olfactory knowledge. Chem Senses 38, 175–186 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Distel, H. Perception of Everyday OdorsCorrelation between Intensity, Familiarity and Strength of Hedonic Judgement. Chem Senses 24, 191–199 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ferdenzi, C. et al. Individual differences in verbal and non-verbal affective responses to smells: Influence of odor label across cultures. Chem Senses 42, 37–46 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Drnovsek, E. et al. Demographic and geographical determinants of human olfactory perception of 909 individuals inhabiting 16 regions. iScience https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2025.113455.

  21. Keller, A. et al. Predicting human olfactory perception from chemical features of odor molecules. Science 1979(355), 820–826 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Ayabe-Kanamura, S., Saito, S., Distel, H., Martínez-Gómez, M. & Hudson, R. Differences and similarities in the perception of everyday odors. A Japanese-German cross-cultural study. Ann N Y Acad Sci 855, 694–700 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Keller, A., Hempstead, M., Gomez, I. A., Gilbert, A. N. & Vosshall, L. B. An olfactory demography of a diverse metropolitan population. BMC Neurosci 13, 122 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Sorokowska, A., Sorokowski, P., Hummel, T. & Huanca, T. Olfaction and environment: Tsimane’ of bolivian rainforest have lower threshold of odor detection than industrialized german people. PLoS One 8, (2013).

  25. Sorokowska, A., Sorokowski, P. & Frackowiak, T. Determinants of human olfactory performance: A cross-cultural study. Sci. Total Environ. 506–507, 196–200 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hoshika, Y. et al. International Comparison of Odor Threshold Values of Several Odorants in Japan and in The Netherlands. in Neurobehavioral Methods and Effects in Occupational and Environmental Health 283–288 (Elsevier, 1994). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-059785-7.50029-6.

  27. Oleszkiewicz, A. et al. Global study of variability in olfactory sensitivity. Behav. Neurosci. 134, 394–406 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Albrecht, J. et al. Activation of olfactory and trigeminal cortical areas following stimulation of the nasal mucosa with low concentrations of S(−)-nicotine vapor-An fMRI study on chemosensory perception. Hum Brain Mapp 30, 699–710 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Brand, G. Olfactory/trigeminal interactions in nasal chemoreception. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 30, 908–917 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Cain, W. S. & Murphy, C. L. Interaction between chemoreceptive modalities of odour and irritation. Nature 284, 255–257 (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Doty, R. L. et al. Intranasal trigeminal stimulation from odorous volatiles: Psychometric responses from anosmic and normal humans. Physiol Behav 20, 175–185 (1978).

    Google Scholar 

  32. Bensafi, M. et al. Dissociated Representations of Pleasant and Unpleasant Olfacto-Trigeminal Mixtures: An fMRI Study. PLoS ONE 7, e38358 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Kobal, G. & Hummel, C. Cerebral chemosensory evoked potentials elicited by chemical stimulation of the human olfactory and respiratory nasal mucosa. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/Evoked Potentials Section 71, 241–250 (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G. & Buchner, A. G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods 39, 175–191 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Philpott, C. M., Wolstenholme, C. R., Goodenough, P. C., Clark, A. & Murty, G. E. Olfactory clearance: what time is needed in clinical practice?. J Laryngol Otol 122, 912–917 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  36. Welge-Lüssen. A, Leopold. D & Miwa. T. Smell and Taste Disorders—Diagnostic and Clinical Work-Up. in Management of Smell and Taste Disorders (Georg Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart, 2014). https://doi.org/10.1055/b-0034-91132.

  37. Xavier, R. Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow (PNIF) for Nasal Breathing Evaluation. Facial Plast. Surg. 40, 310–313 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Croy, I. & Hummel, T. Olfaction as a marker for depression. J Neurol 264, 631–638 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  39. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596.

  40. Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L. & Williams, J. B. W. The PHQ-9. J Gen Intern Med 16, 606–613 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  41. Wechsler, D. Wechsler Memory Scale. PsycTESTS Dataset https://doi.org/10.1037/t27207-000 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  42. Benton, A. L., Hamsher, de S. K. & Sivan, A. B. Controlled Oral Word Association Test. PsycTESTS Dataset. https://doi.org/10.1037/t10132-000 (2017).

  43. Aita, S. L. et al. Executive, language, or both? An examination of the construct validity of verbal fluency measures. Appl Neuropsychol Adult 26, 441–451 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  44. Croy, I., Buschhüter, D., Seo, H.-S., Negoias, S. & Hummel, T. Individual significance of olfaction: development of a questionnaire. Eur. Arch. Otorhinolaryngol. 267, 67–71 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Oleszkiewicz, A. & Hummel, T. Whose nose does not know? Demographical characterization of people unaware of anosmia. Eur. Arch. Otorhinolaryngol. 276, 1849–1852 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Sorokowska, A. et al. Changes of olfactory abilities in relation to age: odor identification in more than 1400 people aged 4 to 80 years. Eur. Arch. Otorhinolaryngol. 272, 1937–1944 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  47. Doty, R. L. & Kamath, V. The influences of age on olfaction: a review. Front Psychol 5, (2014).

  48. Larsson, M. et al. Age-related loss of olfactory sensitivity: Association to dopamine transporter binding in putamen. Neuroscience 161, 422–426 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  49. Kontis, V. et al. Future life expectancy in 35 industrialised countries: projections with a Bayesian model ensemble. The Lancet 389, 1323–1335 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  50. Brand, G. & Millot, J.-L. Sex differences in human olfaction: Between evidence and enigma. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. B 54, 259–270 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  51. Oleszkiewicz, A., Schriever, V. A., Croy, I., Hähner, A. & Hummel, T. Updated Sniffin’ Sticks normative data based on an extended sample of 9139 subjects. Eur. Arch. Otorhinolaryngol. 276, 719–728 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  52. Sorokowski, P. et al. Sex Differences in Human Olfaction: A Meta-Analysis. Front Psychol 10, (2019).

  53. Sorokowska, A. et al. Global Study of Social Odor Awareness. Chem Senses 43, 503–513 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  54. Oleszkiewicz, A., Würfel, H., Han, P. & Hummel, T. Molecularly diverse odors advance olfactory threshold testing. J Sens Stud 33, (2018).

  55. Oleszkiewicz, A., Pellegrino, R., Pusch, K., Margot, C. & Hummel, T. Chemical complexity of odors increases reliability of olfactory threshold testing. Sci Rep 7, 39977 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  56. Waters, W. F., Williamson, D. A., Bernard, B. A., Blouin, D. C. & Faulstich, M. E. Test-retest reliability of psychophysiological assessment. Behav. Res. Ther. 25, 213–221 (1987).

    Google Scholar 

  57. Arena, J. G., Blanchard, E. B., Andrasik, F., Cotch, P. A. & Myers, P. E. Reliability of psychophysiological assessment. Behav. Res. Ther. 21, 447–460 (1983).

    Google Scholar 

  58. Doty, R. L. & Cameron, E. L. Sex differences and reproductive hormone influences on human odor perception. Physiol Behav 97, 213–228 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  59. Olofsson, J. K., Ekström, I., Larsson, M. & Nordin, S. Olfaction and Aging: A Review of the Current State of Research and Future Directions. Iperception 12, 20416695211020332 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  60. Kirova, A.-M., Bays, R. B. & Lagalwar, S. Working Memory and Executive Function Decline across Normal Aging, Mild Cognitive Impairment, and Alzheimer’s Disease. Biomed Res Int 2015, 1–9 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Kiewel, N. A., Wisdom, N. M., Bradshaw, M. R., Pastorek, N. J. & Strutt, A. M. A Retrospective Review of Digit Span-Related Effort Indicators in Probable Alzheimer’s Disease Patients. Clin Neuropsychol 26, 965–974 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  62. Consonni, M. et al. Executive dysfunction affects word list recall performance: Evidence from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and other neurodegenerative diseases. J Neuropsychol 11, 74–90 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  63. Doty, R. L. Olfactory dysfunction in neurodegenerative diseases: is there a common pathological substrate?. Lancet Neurol 16, 478–488 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  64. Doty, R. L. Olfaction in Parkinson’s disease and related disorders. Neurobiol Dis 46, 527–552 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  65. Haehner, A. et al. Olfactory Training in Patients with Parkinson’s Disease. PLoS ONE 8, e61680 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  66. Mesholam, R. I., Moberg, P. J., Mahr, R. N. & Doty, R. L. Olfaction in Neurodegenerative Disease. Arch Neurol 55, 84 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  67. Challakere Ramaswamy, V. M. & Schofield, P. W. Olfaction and Executive Cognitive Performance: A Systematic Review. Front Psychol 13, 871391 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  68. Kohli, P., Soler, Z. M., Nguyen, S. A., Muus, J. S. & Schlosser, R. J. The Association Between Olfaction and Depression: A Systematic Review. Chem Senses 41, 479–486 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  69. Yuan, T.-F. & Slotnick, B. M. Roles of olfactory system dysfunction in depression. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry 54, 26–30 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  70. Liu, D. T. et al. Depression Symptoms and Olfactory-related Quality of Life. Laryngoscope 132, 1829–1834 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  71. Negoias, S. et al. Olfactory bulb volume predicts therapeutic outcome in major depression disorder. Brain Imaging Behav 10, 367–372 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  72. Negoias, S. et al. Reduced olfactory bulb volume and olfactory sensitivity in patients with acute major depression. Neuroscience 169, 415–421 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  73. Pabel, L. D., Murr, J., Weidner, K., Hummel, T. & Croy, I. Null Effect of Olfactory Training With Patients Suffering From Depressive Disorders—An Exploratory Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. Front Psychiatry 11, 593 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  74. Hernandez, A. K., Uhl, C., Haehner, A., Cuevas, M. & Hummel, T. Objective nasal airflow measures in relation to subjective nasal obstruction, trigeminal function, and olfaction in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis. Rhinol. J. (2024).

  75. Fernandez-Garcia, J. C. et al. An increase in visceral fat is associated with a decrease in the taste and olfactory capacity. PLoS ONE 12, e0171204 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  76. Hubert, H. B., Fabsitz, R. R., Feinleib, M. & Brown, K. S. Olfactory Sensitivity in Humans: Genetic Versus Environmental Control. Science 1979(208), 607–609 (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  77. Wysocki, C. J., Dorries, K. M. & Beauchamp, G. K. Ability to perceive androstenone can be acquired by ostensibly anosmic people. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 86, 7976–7978 (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  78. Broillet-Olivier, E. et al. Development of an rpS6-Based Ex Vivo Assay for the Analysis of Neuronal Activity in Mouse and Human Olfactory Systems. Int J Mol Sci 25, 13173 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  79. Sadoul, B., Blumstein, D. T., Alfonso, S. & Geffroy, B. Human protection drives the emergence of a new coping style in animals. PLoS Biol 19, e3001186 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  80. Martinez, Q., Amson, E. & Laska, M. Does the number of functional olfactory receptor genes predict olfactory sensitivity and discrimination performance in mammals?. J Evol Biol 37, 238–247 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  81. Frasnelli, J. & Hummel, T. Age-related decline of intranasal trigeminal sensitivity: Is it a peripheral event? Brain Res 987, (2003).

  82. Khan, S. et al. The impact of race on olfaction: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol 13, 2063–2072 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  83. Guarneros, M., Hummel, T., Martinez-Gomez, M. & Hudson, R. Mexico City Air Pollution Adversely Affects Olfactory Function and Intranasal Trigeminal Sensitivity. Chem Senses 34, 819–826 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  84. Majid, A., Speed, L., Croijmans, I. & Arshamian, A. What makes a better smeller?. Perception 46, 406–430 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  85. Oleszkiewicz, A., Pozzer, A., Williams, J. & Hummel, T. Ambient air pollution undermines chemosensory sensitivity – a global perspective. Sci Rep 14, 30462 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  86. Philpott, C., Goodenough, P., Passant, C., Robertson, A. & Murty, G. The effect of temperature, humidity and peak inspiratory nasal flow on olfactory thresholds. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 29, 24–31 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  87. Huang, Y. et al. Household PM2.5 pollution in rural Chinese homes: Levels, dynamic characteristics and seasonal variations. Sci. Total Environ. 817, 153085 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  88. Wang, J. et al. Quantifying the dynamic characteristics of indoor air pollution using real-time sensors: Current status and future implication. Environ Int 175, 107934 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  89. Pillarisetti, A., Ye, W. & Chowdhury, S. Indoor Air Pollution and Health: Bridging Perspectives from Developing and Developed Countries. Annu Rev Environ Resour 47, 197–229 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  90. Oleszkiewicz, A., Croy, I. & Hummel, T. The impact of olfactory loss on quality of life: a 2025 review. Chem Senses 50, (2025).

Download references

Funding

Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. This work was supported by National Science Center (Poland) Grant Number: OPUS 20 #2020/39/B/HS6/01533 (AO).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Psychology, University of Wroclaw, Wrocław, Poland

    Aleksandra Reichert, Daniel Marek, Barbara Zyzelewicz & Anna Oleszkiewicz

  2. Laboratory of Neural Circuits and Behaviour (LNCB), Department of Biology, Indian Institute of Science Education and Research (IISER), Pune, Maharashtra, India

    Nixon M. Abraham, Jancy N. Abraham & Devesh Rawat

  3. Department of Life Sciences, Centre of Excellence in Epigenetics, Shiv Nadar Institution of Eminence, Uttar Pradesh, Gautam Buddha Nagar, Greater Noida, India

    Jancy N. Abraham

  4. Pontifícia Universidade Católica Do Paraná (PUC-PR), Paraná, Brazil

    Maria Laura Albanese & Isabel Bernardes Moura

  5. ENT and Head and Neck Research Center and Department, School of Medicine, The Five Senses Health Institute, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Rafieh Alizadeh, Marjan Mirsalehi & Farhad Rafiei

  6. Department of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Research laboratory “Clinical Psychology: Intersubjectivity and Culture”, Institut Kassab, Manouba, Tunisia

    Ines Aloulou, Imen Miri & Hanène Naija

  7. Chemical Senses and Mental Health Laboratory, Department of Psychology, School of Public Health, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China

    Lixin Chen, Hangying Wu & Laiquan Zou

  8. St. Luke’s Medical Center, Quezon City, Manila, Philippines

    Ma. Lourdes Berioso Enecilla

  9. Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL), Londrina, Brazil

    Marco Aurélio Fornazieri

  10. Department of Anatomy, Université du Québec À Trois-Rivières, Trois-Rivières, Canada

    Johannes Frasnelli & Élizabeth Michaluk

  11. Hospital Naval Dr. Pedro Mallo, Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Juan Martin Fuselli

  12. East Avenue Medical Center, Manila, Philippines

    Fatima Gansatao

  13. Faculty of Medicine, Department of Biophysics, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey

    Cagdas Guducu

  14. Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Smell & Taste Clinic, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany

    Anna Kristina Hernandez, Plamena Miteva, Thomas Hummel & Anna Oleszkiewicz

  15. Department of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Philippine General Hospital, University of the Philippines – Manila, Manila, Philippines

    Anna Kristina Hernandez

  16. Department of Psychology, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada

    Marlise K. Hofer & Brianna J. Turner

  17. Department of Otorhinolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

    Salina Husain & Anasuha Musa

  18. Department of Otolaryngology, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt

    Reda Kamel, Ahmed Radwan & Hozifa Alsaid Sheta

  19. Food, Flavour and Fragrance Lab, School of Psychological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia

    Elliott Lamond, Mehmet K. Mahmut & Nora Van Oosterhout

  20. Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Cagliari, SP 8 Cittadella Universitaria, Monserrato, Italy

    Francesco Loy & Carla Masala

  21. Department of Otolaryngology, Nippon Medical School, Tokyo, Japan

    Keigo Nakaachi & Ayaho Yoshino

  22. Department of Surgery, Pritzker School of Medicine, the University of Chicago Biological Sciences Division, Chicago, USA

    Jayant M. Pinto, Henrique O. Scussiatto & Sharanya M. Thodupunoori

  23. Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Patricia Portillo Mazal

  24. Department of Otolaryngology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland

    Katarzyna Resler

Authors

  1. Aleksandra Reichert
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nixon M. Abraham
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jancy N. Abraham
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Maria Laura Albanese
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Rafieh Alizadeh
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ines Aloulou
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Lixin Chen
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Ma. Lourdes Berioso Enecilla
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Marco Aurélio Fornazieri
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Johannes Frasnelli
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Juan Martin Fuselli
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Fatima Gansatao
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Cagdas Guducu
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Anna Kristina Hernandez
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Marlise K. Hofer
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Salina Husain
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Reda Kamel
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Elliott Lamond
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Francesco Loy
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  20. Mehmet K. Mahmut
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  21. Daniel Marek
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  22. Carla Masala
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  23. Élizabeth Michaluk
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  24. Imen Miri
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  25. Marjan Mirsalehi
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  26. Plamena Miteva
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  27. Isabel Bernardes Moura
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  28. Anasuha Musa
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  29. Hanène Naija
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  30. Keigo Nakaachi
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  31. Jayant M. Pinto
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  32. Patricia Portillo Mazal
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  33. Ahmed Radwan
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  34. Farhad Rafiei
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  35. Devesh Rawat
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  36. Katarzyna Resler
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  37. Henrique O. Scussiatto
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  38. Hozifa Alsaid Sheta
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  39. Sharanya M. Thodupunoori
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  40. Brianna J. Turner
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  41. Nora Van Oosterhout
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  42. Hangying Wu
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  43. Ayaho Yoshino
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  44. Laiquan Zou
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  45. Barbara Zyzelewicz
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  46. Thomas Hummel
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  47. Anna Oleszkiewicz
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: AO, TH Methodology: AO, TH Project administration: AR, AO, TH Investigation: All authors Formal analysis: DM, BZ, AR, AO Visualization: AR, AO Supervision: AO, TH Writing—original draft: AR, AO Writing—review & editing: All authors.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to
Aleksandra Reichert or Anna Oleszkiewicz.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Information.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Reichert, A., Abraham, N.M., Abraham, J.N. et al. Human olfactory sensitivity varies across geographical locations.
Sci Rep (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-38727-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-38727-w

Keywords

  • Olfaction
  • Neuroscience
  • Olfactory system
  • Olfactory sensitivity
  • Psychology

Source: Ecology - nature.com

The natural architecture of oyster reefs maximizes recruit survival

Land use and land cover dynamics in dryland ecosystem of Northwestern Ethiopia: taking into account uncertainties and correcting bias in satellite-based maps

This portal is not a newspaper as it is updated without periodicity. It cannot be considered an editorial product pursuant to law n. 62 of 7.03.2001. The author of the portal is not responsible for the content of comments to posts, the content of the linked sites. Some texts or images included in this portal are taken from the internet and, therefore, considered to be in the public domain; if their publication is violated, the copyright will be promptly communicated via e-mail. They will be immediately removed.

Back to Top
Close