Pheromones in Context
Despite all that, pheromones are NOT magic spills. My tip to you is NOT to jump on everything. All products sound very promising if you read the forums on pherotruth but resist the temptation of buying everything at once. In other words, don't do my mistake (I'm selling a couple of them now).
By the way, regarding PheromoneXS. I don't know if Wildcard said it, but if you are buying a product from PheromoneXS (PXS) that contain couplins, then their Sultan Oud cover scent is known to be the best scent to cover up the unattractive scent of couplins. The scent FXS will NOT do the job. On that note, Gandhi , FXS is their most popular scent, then comes Nobility. I bought Xist, Taboo and Love Boat in nobility scent due to its many good reviews but sadly I didn't like it. In your upcoming order, you can ask them for a scent package sample.
For the members here, if you want try different pheromone products from different companies, check out their "trading post" thread and you will see my post in which I'm selling some of my stuff at a reduced price than retail. Due to shipping cost, it's not worth it to buy one product but if you want to test from different vendors then I believe it would be a good deal. Learn more about Pherazone at http://www.acimeksikabiberhapi.com/small-doses-of-pherazone.
The marks carry information on the sex of the animal who produced them and that this information is independent of the total amount of scent present. The question, of course, remains which one of the various excretions and secretions mixed into a scent mark by the performing monkey is the carrier of this information. As our data indicate, urine alone, which is one component of intact marks, contains the information, or has picked enough of it from the skin glands to motivate the subjects to show their usual preference. It remains up to further experimentation to test the information contained in skin secretions alone. Check out Pherazone at http://www.iktak.net/project/94.
2) In order to test the ability of marmosets to discriminate between the scent marks of two individuals of the same sex, the subjects had to be motivated to prefer the odor of one individual over that of another. Since aggression against a conspeci- frc was observed to stimulate great interest in the scent marks of this particular animal, it was expected that the subjects would prefer the odor of an individual with whom they had recently fought over that of another familiar animal which they had not recently met. Therefore, an individual belonging to a strange group was introduced to the subjects for 10 minutes. This resulted in an aggressive en- counter between the subjects and the stranger. Later, the subjects were given the choice between a wooden perch scent marked by the stimulus animal and a perch marked by another individual of the same sex, also belonging to a strange group, against whom they had not fought recently.
In these tests, the subjects spent significantly more time investigating, sniffing and marking the perches carrying the scent of those males and females with whom they had recently fought than they spent with the perches carrying the marks of familiar but ‘neutral’ adults of the same sex as their recent opponent (male opponents: time preference P=0.027; sniffing preference P= 0.008; marking preference P: 0.027.