| Literature DB >> 29250448 |
Guangfa Jiao1,2, Guozhong Zhang3, Haiying Wang2, Weilin Zhao2, Yanwei Cui2, Yongjing Liu2, Feng Gao4, Fang Yuan1, Yi Zhang1,5.
Abstract
To study the neuroendocrine mechanism of sugar preference, we investigated the role of glucose feeding in the regulation of expression levels of neuropeptides derived from proopiomelanocortin (POMC) in the lateral hypothalamus (LH) and nucleus accumbens (NAc) in fructose preference rats. Fructose preference rats were induced by using the lithium chloride backward conditioning procedure. The fructose preference was confirmed by the two-bottle test. The drinking behavior of rats was assessed by the fructose concentration gradient test. The preference of 10% glucose or 0.1% saccharine was assessed, and the expression levels of neuropeptides derived from POMC in the LH and the NAc in fructose preference rats were measured by Western blot analysis. Fructose preference rats displayed a greater fructose preference than control rats. Furthermore, fructose preference rats preferred glucose solution rather than saccharine solution, while control rats preferred saccharine solution rather than glucose solution. The expression levels of neuropeptides derived from POMC in the LH and the NAc were changed by glucose but not saccharine intake. In summary, the data suggests that glucose intake increases the expression of neuropeptides derived from POMC in the LH and the NAc in fructose preference rats.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29250448 PMCID: PMC5698817 DOI: 10.1155/2017/6589424
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Neural Plast ISSN: 1687-5443 Impact factor: 3.599
Figure 1Two-bottle test for fructose preference (liquid intake (a) and preference ratio (b)). Data are represented as mean ± SEM, n = 15 in each group. ∗∗p < 0.01 control rats (CON) versus fructose preference rats (FP).
Figure 2Fructose concentration gradient test. Data are represented as mean ± SEM, n = 8 in each group. ∗∗p < 0.01 versus 10% fructose solution, ##p < 0.01 versus 8% fructose solution, $p < 0.05, and $$p < 0.01 versus 0% fructose solution intragroup and &p < 0.05 and &&p < 0.01 control rats (CON) versus fructose preference rats (FP) for corresponding concentration of fructose solution.
Figure 3One-bottle test for saccharine and glucose choice. Data are represented as mean ± SEM, n = 13 in each group. ∗∗p < 0.01 versus corresponding 0.1% saccharine.
Figure 4Two-bottle test for saccharine and glucose choice (2 h intake test (a) and flavor solution test (b) of fructose preference rats). Data are represented as mean ± SEM, n = 15 in each group. ∗∗p < 0.01 10% glucose versus 0.1% saccharine.
Figure 5Expression of the POMC protein in the NAc (a) and LH (b) of rats intervened with water, 0.1% saccharine, and 10% glucose. Data are represented as mean ± SEM, n = 3 in each group. ∗p < 0.05 and ∗∗p < 0.01 versus water intragroup, #p < 0.05 versus 0.1% saccharine intragroup, and &&p < 0.01 control rats (CON) versus fructose preference rats (FP) for corresponding solution.