Literature DB >> 16530236

Sucrose motivation in sweet "sensitive" (C57BL/6J) and "subsensitive" (129P3/J) mice measured by progressive ratio licking.

Anthony Sclafani1.   

Abstract

As compared to C57BL/6J mice, 129P3/J mice show weaker preferences for and lower intakes of dilute sugar solutions. These differences have been attributed to genetic differences in their sweet taste receptor. The two mouse strains do not differ, however, in their intake of concentrated sugar solutions. The post-oral satiating effect of concentrated sugar solutions may mask strain differences in the avidity for these solutions. This hypothesis was investigated using fixed ratio (FR, low demand) and progressive ratio (PR, high demand) operant licking tests (22h/day) to measure sugar appetite. In Experiment 1, sucrose-experienced 129 mice licked less than did B6 mice for 4% but not for 16% sucrose in free access bottle tests and FR operant tests. Yet, in PR tests the 129 mice licked as much for 4% sucrose and more for 16% sucrose than did B6 mice. In Experiment 2, sucrose-naive 129 mice licked less than did B6 mice in FR and PR tests with 0.4% saccharin but the strains did not differ in PR licking in their first test with 16% sucrose. After they were given unconstrained bottle access to 16% sucrose for 3 days, the 129 mice now licked more than B6 mice in a second sucrose PR test. Thus, despite having a less sensitive sweet taste receptor, 129 mice are as much or more motivated to obtain sucrose than are B6 mice and appear to be more influenced by prior experience with sugar. This suggests that the strains differ in their central reward processing of sweet taste.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16530236     DOI: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2006.01.017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Physiol Behav        ISSN: 0031-9384


  26 in total

1.  Gut T1R3 sweet taste receptors do not mediate sucrose-conditioned flavor preferences in mice.

Authors:  Anthony Sclafani; Damien S Glass; Robert F Margolskee; John I Glendinning
Journal:  Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol       Date:  2010-10-06       Impact factor: 3.619

2.  Nutrient selection in the absence of taste receptor signaling.

Authors:  Xueying Ren; Jozélia G Ferreira; Ligang Zhou; Sara J Shammah-Lagnado; Catherine W Yeckel; Ivan E de Araujo
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2010-06-09       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Oxytocin knockout mice demonstrate enhanced intake of sweet and nonsweet carbohydrate solutions.

Authors:  Anthony Sclafani; Linda Rinaman; Regis R Vollmer; Janet A Amico
Journal:  Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol       Date:  2007-02-01       Impact factor: 3.619

4.  Taste-evoked responses to sweeteners in the nucleus of the solitary tract differ between C57BL/6ByJ and 129P3/J mice.

Authors:  Stuart A McCaughey
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2007-01-03       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Allelic variation of the Tas1r3 taste receptor gene selectively affects taste responses to sweeteners: evidence from 129.B6-Tas1r3 congenic mice.

Authors:  Masashi Inoue; John I Glendinning; Maria L Theodorides; Sarah Harkness; Xia Li; Natalia Bosak; Gary K Beauchamp; Alexander A Bachmanov
Journal:  Physiol Genomics       Date:  2007-10-02       Impact factor: 3.107

Review 6.  From appetite setpoint to appetition: 50years of ingestive behavior research.

Authors:  Anthony Sclafani
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2018-01-02

7.  Strain differences in sucrose- and fructose-conditioned flavor preferences in mice.

Authors:  Alexander Pinhas; Michael Aviel; Michael Koen; Simon Gurgov; Vanessa Acosta; Michael Israel; Leonid Kakuriev; Elena Guskova; Isabelle Fuzailov; Khalid Touzani; Anthony Sclafani; Richard J Bodnar
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2011-09-14

8.  Amino acid and carbohydrate preferences in C57BL/6ByJ and 129P3/J mice.

Authors:  Alexander A Bachmanov; Gary K Beauchamp
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2007-08-08

9.  Examination of the perception of sweet- and bitter-like taste qualities in sucralose preferring and avoiding rats.

Authors:  A-M Torregrossa; G C Loney; J C Smith; L A Eckel
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2014-12-10

10.  Maltodextrin and sucrose preferences in sweet-sensitive (C57BL/6J) and subsensitive (129P3/J) mice revisited.

Authors:  Karen Ackroff; Anthony Sclafani
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2016-08-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.