Literature DB >> 9402608

Flavor preferences conditioned by intragastric polycose in rats: more concentrated polycose is not always more reinforcing.

F Lucas1, A V Azzara, A Sclafani.   

Abstract

Prior studies have obtained conditioned preferences for flavors paired with intragastric (IG) infusions of Polycose (hydrolyzed starch) at concentrations of 1-32% over a different flavor paired with IG water. The present study determined if rats would also learn to prefer a flavor paired with concentrated Polycose infusion over a flavor paired with a more dilute Polycose infusion. In Experiment 1, adult female rats were food-deprived and trained during alternating one-bottle sessions (30 min/day) to associate one flavored solution (the CS + 8) with IG infusions of 8% Polycose, a second flavored solution (the CS + 16) with IG infusions of 16% Polycose, and a third flavored solution (the CS-) with IG water infusions. In subsequent choice tests, the rats displayed similar preferences for the CS + 8 and CS + 16 over the CS-, but preferred the CS + 16 to CS + 8 in a direct choice test. A similar preference pattern was obtained in 22 h/day tests with the rats nondeprived. In Experiment 2, new rats were similarly trained and tested but with CS + 16 and CS + 32 solutions paired with 16% and 32% Polycose infusions, respectively. The rats preferred both CS+ solutions over the CS- solution in the short- and long-term tests. However, the CS + 16 was preferred over the CS + 32 by the food-deprived rats in the short-term tests. The two CS+ solutions were equally preferred in the long-term tests with food ad lib. These and other findings indicate that the postingestive reinforcing action of Polycose increases as concentration increases from 1% to 16% but does not increase further, and may actually decrease, at a 32% concentration. The rapid satiating effect of concentrated carbohydrate solutions may limit their reinforcing consequences.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9402608     DOI: 10.1016/s0031-9384(97)00364-8

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


  12 in total

Review 1.  Gut-brain nutrient signaling. Appetition vs. satiation.

Authors:  Anthony Sclafani
Journal:  Appetite       Date:  2012-06-01       Impact factor: 3.868

2.  Potentiation of taste and extract stimuli in conditioned flavor preference learning.

Authors:  Elizabeth D Capaldi; Gregory J Privitera
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.986

3.  Conditioned preference for sweet stimuli in OLETF rat: effects of food deprivation.

Authors:  Bart C De Jonghe; Andras Hajnal; Mihai Covasa
Journal:  Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol       Date:  2007-02-01       Impact factor: 3.619

4.  Post-oral infusion sites that support glucose-conditioned flavor preferences in rats.

Authors:  Karen Ackroff; Yeh-Min Yiin; Anthony Sclafani
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2009-12-21

5.  The CS-US delay gradient in flavor preference conditioning with intragastric carbohydrate infusions.

Authors:  Karen Ackroff; Debra Blusk Drucker; Anthony Sclafani
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2011-08-05

6.  Rapid post-oral stimulation of intake and flavor conditioning in rats by glucose but not a non-metabolizable glucose analog.

Authors:  Karen Ackroff; Anthony Sclafani
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2014-05-06

7.  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

8.  Sucrose taste but not Polycose taste conditions flavor preferences in rats.

Authors:  Kristine B Bonacchi; Karen Ackroff; Anthony Sclafani
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2008-06-17

Review 9.  Learned flavor preferences. The variable potency of post-oral nutrient reinforcers.

Authors:  Karen Ackroff
Journal:  Appetite       Date:  2008-07-07       Impact factor: 3.868

Review 10.  An evolutionary perspective on food and human taste.

Authors:  Paul A S Breslin
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2013-05-06       Impact factor: 10.834

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.