Literature DB >> 25715333

Postoral glucose sensing, not caloric content, determines sugar reward in C57BL/6J mice.

Anthony Sclafani1, Steven Zukerman2, Karen Ackroff2.   

Abstract

Recent studies suggest that because of their energy value, sugars are more rewarding than non-caloric sweeteners. However, intragastric infusion data indicate that sugars differ in their postoral appetite-stimulating effects. We therefore compared the preference for isocaloric 8% sucrose, glucose, and fructose solutions with that of a non-caloric sweetener solution (0.8% sucralose) in C57BL/6J mice. Brief 2-bottle tests indicated that sucralose was isopreferred to sucrose but more preferred than glucose or fructose. Yet, in long-term tests, the mice preferred sucrose and glucose, but not fructose to sucralose. Additional experiments were conducted with a non-caloric 0.1% sucralose + 0.1% saccharin mixture (S + S), which does not have the postoral inhibitory effects of 0.8% sucralose. The S + S was preferred to fructose in brief and long-term choice tests. S + S was also preferred to glucose and sucrose in brief tests, but the sugars were preferred in long-term tests. In progressive ratio tests, non-deprived and food-deprived mice licked more for glucose but not fructose than for S + S. These findings demonstrate that the nutrient-specific postoral actions, not calories per se, determine the avidity for sugar versus non-caloric sweeteners. Furthermore, sweet taste intensity and potential postoral inhibitory actions must be considered in comparing non-caloric and caloric sweeteners.
© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  fructose; postoral conditioning; progressive ratio test; sucralose; sucrose

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25715333      PMCID: PMC4398051          DOI: 10.1093/chemse/bjv002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Chem Senses        ISSN: 0379-864X            Impact factor:   3.160


  49 in total

1.  Flavor preferences conditioned by intragastric fructose and glucose: differences in reinforcement potency.

Authors:  K Ackroff; K Touzani; T K Peets; A Sclafani
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2001-04

Review 2.  Role of gut nutrient sensing in stimulating appetite and conditioning food preferences.

Authors:  Anthony Sclafani; Karen Ackroff
Journal:  Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol       Date:  2012-03-21       Impact factor: 3.619

3.  Contingent and non-contingent actions of sucrose and saccharin reinforcers: effects on taste preference and memory.

Authors:  C Messier; N M White
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  1984-02

4.  Dissociation of palatability and calorie effects in learned flavor preferences.

Authors:  Z S Warwick; H P Weingarten
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  1994-03

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

Authors:  Anthony Sclafani
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2006-03-10

6.  Post-oral glucose stimulation of intake and conditioned flavor preference in C57BL/6J mice: a concentration-response study.

Authors:  Steven Zukerman; Karen Ackroff; Anthony Sclafani
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2012-11-28

7.  T1R3 taste receptor is critical for sucrose but not Polycose taste.

Authors:  Steven Zukerman; John I Glendinning; Robert F Margolskee; Anthony Sclafani
Journal:  Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol       Date:  2008-12-17       Impact factor: 3.619

8.  Food reward in the absence of taste receptor signaling.

Authors:  Ivan E de Araujo; Albino J Oliveira-Maia; Tatyana D Sotnikova; Raul R Gainetdinov; Marc G Caron; Miguel A L Nicolelis; Sidney A Simon
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2008-03-27       Impact factor: 17.173

9.  Flavor preferences conditioned by intragastric infusions of dilute polycose solutions.

Authors:  K Ackroff; A Sclafani
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  1994-05

10.  Intravascular food reward.

Authors:  Albino J Oliveira-Maia; Craig D Roberts; Q David Walker; Brooke Luo; Cynthia Kuhn; Sidney A Simon; Miguel A L Nicolelis
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-09-27       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  26 in total

1.  Flavor preferences conditioned by nutritive and non-nutritive sweeteners in mice.

Authors:  Anthony Sclafani; Karen Ackroff
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2017-02-10

2.  CAST/EiJ and C57BL/6J Mice Differ in Their Oral and Postoral Attraction to Glucose and Fructose.

Authors:  Anthony Sclafani; Austin S Vural; Karen Ackroff
Journal:  Chem Senses       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 3.160

Review 3.  From appetite setpoint to appetition: 50years of ingestive behavior research.

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

4.  Ghrelin signaling is not essential for sugar or fat conditioned flavor preferences in mice.

Authors:  Anthony Sclafani; Khalid Touzani; Karen Ackroff
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2015-05-21

5.  Advantame sweetener preference in C57BL/6J mice and Sprague-Dawley rats.

Authors:  Anthony Sclafani; Karen Ackroff
Journal:  Chem Senses       Date:  2015-01-05       Impact factor: 3.160

6.  Integration of Sweet Taste and Metabolism Determines Carbohydrate Reward.

Authors:  Maria Geraldine Veldhuizen; Richard Keith Babbs; Barkha Patel; Wambura Fobbs; Nils B Kroemer; Elizabeth Garcia; Martin R Yeomans; Dana M Small
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2017-08-10       Impact factor: 10.834

7.  Operant licking for intragastric sugar infusions: Differential reinforcing actions of glucose, sucrose and fructose in mice.

Authors:  Anthony Sclafani; Karen Ackroff
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2015-10-17

8.  BALB/c and SWR inbred mice differ in post-oral fructose appetition as revealed by sugar versus non-nutritive sweetener tests.

Authors:  Tamar T Kraft; Donald Huang; Melanie Lolier; Deena Warshaw; Sam LaMagna; Elona Natanova; Anthony Sclafani; Richard J Bodnar
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2015-10-17

9.  Flavor change and food deprivation are not critical for post-oral glucose appetition in mice.

Authors:  Karen Ackroff; Anthony Sclafani
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2014-12-04

10.  MCH receptor deletion does not impair glucose-conditioned flavor preferences in mice.

Authors:  Anthony Sclafani; Antoine Adamantidis; Karen Ackroff
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2016-05-16
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.