jvkohl
03-22-2004, 08:28 PM
Some
forum members may be interested in the following post sent today to listservers for evolutionary psychology;
sexuality; and chemical senses. Though the focus on the post
is on recent neuroscientific reports, the question
remains:
How does mammalian biology allow for males and females to find visual appeal in other males and
females?
--------------------------------------------------
Whether or not there is a functional human
vomeronasal organ (VNO), human pheromones appear to elicit a typical mammalian luteinizing hormone (LH) response.
This biological fact might antagonize those with the anthropocentric view that trichomatic vision differentiates us
from other primates, at least when it comes to our olfactory prowess (as indicated and subsequently contraindicated
below).
--------------indicated--------------------
Unlike other New World Monkeys, these [howler monkeys]
have a full set of visual proteins, so can distinguish all colors in their environment. To achieve this full color
vision, the howler, like humans and apes, increased their proportion of olfactory pseudogenes and lost part of their
keen sense of
smell.
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/afp/20040
119/primate.html (\"http://dsc.discovery.com/news/afp/20040119/primate.html\")
--------contraindicated--------------------
This and other observations indicate that
howler monkeys have maintained both their systems of pheromone communication and full trichromatic vision,
suggesting that the presence of full trichromacy alone does not lead to the loss of pheromone communication. We
suggest that the ecological differences between OW and NW primates, particularly in habitat selection, may have also
affected the evolution of pheromone perception.
Genetic Evidence for the Coexistence of Pheromone Perception and
Full Trichromatic Vision in Howler Monkeys David M. Webb, Liliana Cortes-Ortiz, and Jianzhi Zhang
Mol. Biol. Evol.
2004 21(4): p.
697-704
http://mbe.oupjournals.org/cgi/conte
nt/abstract/21/4/697?ct (\"http://mbe.oupjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/21/4/697?ct\")
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Even as
comparisons are made and remade, it is more interesting to ask whether anyone might attempt to explain sexual
differentiation of the amygdala, which is indicated in the following
abstract:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&
;list_uids=15004563 (\"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&
list_uids=15004563\")
In my opinion, there is no evidence that a sexually dimorphic response to visual input
could develop unless it developed in accord with the logical link from mammalian pheromones to LH, sex steroid
hormone production, and neuroanatomical sexual differentiation (e.g., olfactory conditioning of the visual
response).
\"...the functional significance of the conditioned change in LH secretion lies principally in the
unequivocal demonstration that olfactory cues can activate the male pituitary-gonadal axis in a way that mimics, in
every respect, the activation achieved by exposure to a
female.\"
http://www.nel.edu/22_5/NEL220501R01_Review
.htm (\"http://www.nel.edu/22_5/NEL220501R01_Review.htm\")
The development of food preferences is more likely to be based upon olfactory input (conditioning)
than on visual input alone. If sexual differentiation of the visual response (e.g., mate preferences) is not due to
pheromonal conditioning, how might it occur, biologically?
forum members may be interested in the following post sent today to listservers for evolutionary psychology;
sexuality; and chemical senses. Though the focus on the post
is on recent neuroscientific reports, the question
remains:
How does mammalian biology allow for males and females to find visual appeal in other males and
females?
--------------------------------------------------
Whether or not there is a functional human
vomeronasal organ (VNO), human pheromones appear to elicit a typical mammalian luteinizing hormone (LH) response.
This biological fact might antagonize those with the anthropocentric view that trichomatic vision differentiates us
from other primates, at least when it comes to our olfactory prowess (as indicated and subsequently contraindicated
below).
--------------indicated--------------------
Unlike other New World Monkeys, these [howler monkeys]
have a full set of visual proteins, so can distinguish all colors in their environment. To achieve this full color
vision, the howler, like humans and apes, increased their proportion of olfactory pseudogenes and lost part of their
keen sense of
smell.
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/afp/20040
119/primate.html (\"http://dsc.discovery.com/news/afp/20040119/primate.html\")
--------contraindicated--------------------
This and other observations indicate that
howler monkeys have maintained both their systems of pheromone communication and full trichromatic vision,
suggesting that the presence of full trichromacy alone does not lead to the loss of pheromone communication. We
suggest that the ecological differences between OW and NW primates, particularly in habitat selection, may have also
affected the evolution of pheromone perception.
Genetic Evidence for the Coexistence of Pheromone Perception and
Full Trichromatic Vision in Howler Monkeys David M. Webb, Liliana Cortes-Ortiz, and Jianzhi Zhang
Mol. Biol. Evol.
2004 21(4): p.
697-704
http://mbe.oupjournals.org/cgi/conte
nt/abstract/21/4/697?ct (\"http://mbe.oupjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/21/4/697?ct\")
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Even as
comparisons are made and remade, it is more interesting to ask whether anyone might attempt to explain sexual
differentiation of the amygdala, which is indicated in the following
abstract:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&
;list_uids=15004563 (\"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&
list_uids=15004563\")
In my opinion, there is no evidence that a sexually dimorphic response to visual input
could develop unless it developed in accord with the logical link from mammalian pheromones to LH, sex steroid
hormone production, and neuroanatomical sexual differentiation (e.g., olfactory conditioning of the visual
response).
\"...the functional significance of the conditioned change in LH secretion lies principally in the
unequivocal demonstration that olfactory cues can activate the male pituitary-gonadal axis in a way that mimics, in
every respect, the activation achieved by exposure to a
female.\"
http://www.nel.edu/22_5/NEL220501R01_Review
.htm (\"http://www.nel.edu/22_5/NEL220501R01_Review.htm\")
The development of food preferences is more likely to be based upon olfactory input (conditioning)
than on visual input alone. If sexual differentiation of the visual response (e.g., mate preferences) is not due to
pheromonal conditioning, how might it occur, biologically?