ArticlePhysiology & behavior2012
Pontine and thalamic influences on fluid rewards: III. Anticipatory contrast for sucrose and corn oil.
Article in Physiology & behavior, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Satb2 neurons in the parabrachial nucleus mediate taste perception.Nature communications · 2021Article
- Drug-motivated behavior in rats with lesions of the thalamic orosensory area.Behavioral neuroscience · 2016Article
- Relative reward effects on operant behavior: Incentive contrast, induction and variety effects.Behavioural processes · 2015Article
- Thalamic contribution to cortical processing of taste and expectation.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2013Article
- Bilateral lesions of the thalamic trigeminal orosensory area dissociate natural from drug reward in contrast paradigms.Behavioral neuroscience · 2012Article
- Article
- Conditioned Aversion for a Cocaine-Predictive Cue is Associated with Cocaine Seeking and Taking in Rats.International journal of comparative psychologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
An anticipatory contrast effect (ACE) occurs when, across daily trials, an animal comes to respond less than normally to a first stimulus when it is followed shortly by a second, more preferred solution. Classically, ACE is studied using a low (L) concentration of saccharin or sucrose, followed by access to a higher (H) concentration of sucrose. Subjects in the control condition have two bouts of access to the weaker solution presented on the same schedule. The ACE is measured by the difference in intake of the first bout low solution between subjects in the low-low (L-L) vs. the low-high (L-H) conditions. Here we used this paradigm with sham feeding rats and determined that nutritional feedback was unnecessary for the development of ACE with two concentrations of sucrose or with two concentrations of corn oil. Next we showed that ibotenic acid lesions centered in the orosensory thalamus spared ACEs for both sucrose and corn oil. In contrast, lesions of the pontine parabrachial nuclei (PBN), the second central relay for taste in the rat, disrupted ACEs for both sucrose and corn oil. Although the sensory modalities needed for the oral detection of fats remain controversial, it appears that the PBN is involved in processing the comparison of disparate concentrations of sucrose and oil reward.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.