Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21945373›Full record

ArticlePhysiology & behavior2012

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

Alexander Pinhas, Michael Aviel, Michael Koen, Simon Gurgov, Vanessa Acosta, Michael Israel, Leonid Kakuriev, Elena Guskova, Isabelle Fuzailov, Khalid Touzani and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Fructose- and glucose-conditioned preferences in FVB mice: strain differences in post-oral sugar appetition.American journal of physiology. Regulatory, integrative and comparative physiology · 2014
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Alexander PinhasDepartment of Psychology, Queens College, City University of New York, United States.
Michael Aviel
Michael Koen
Simon Gurgov
Vanessa Acosta
Michael Israel
Leonid Kakuriev
Elena Guskova
Isabelle Fuzailov
Khalid Touzani
Anthony Sclafani
Richard J Bodnar
Queens College, CUNY · USBrooklyn College · USCity University of New York · USThe Graduate Center, CUNY · US

Funding

Carbohydrate Appetite, Fat Appetite and ObesityR37DK031135 · NIDDK · BROOKLYN COLLEGE · PI SCLAFANI, ANTHONY · 2001 to 2010
$2.9M
CARBOHYDRATE APPETITE, FAT APPETITE, AND OBESITYR01DK031135 · NIDDK · BROOKLYN COLLEGE · PI ACKROFF, KAREN, SCLAFANI, ANTHONY · 1986 to 2015
$2.0M
Neuropharmacology of Learned Food PreferencesR01DK071761 · NIDDK · BROOKLYN COLLEGE · PI SCLAFANI, ANTHONY · 2005 to 2009
$1.3M
LOCAL EFFERENT ACTIVATION THROUGH INFERIOR COLLICULUSR01DC004194 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI DOLAN, DAVID FRANCIS · 2000 to 2004
$1.2M
Discovery of Natural Products and Natural Product-Like InhibitorsZ01DK031135 · NIDDK · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DIABETES AND DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES · PI BEWLEY, CAROLE · 2007 to 2008
$844k
OPIOID RECEPTOR SUBTYPE ROLES IN RAT FEEDING BEHAVIORR01DA004194 · NIDA · QUEENS COLLEGE · PI BODNAR, RICHARD J · 1989 to 1995
–
Intramural NIH HHS Z01 DK031135NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA004194NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC004194NIDDK NIH HHS DK031135NIDDK NIH HHS DK071761NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK031135NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK071761NIDDK NIH HHS R37 DK031135
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genetic factors strongly influence the intake and preference for sugar and saccharin solutions in inbred mouse strains. The present study determined if genetic variance also influences the learned preferences for flavors added to sugar solutions. Conditioned flavor preferences (CFPs) are produced in rodents by adding a flavor (CS+) to a sugar solution and a different flavor (CS-) to a saccharin solution (CS-) in one-bottle training trials; the CS+ is subsequently preferred to the CS- when both are presented in saccharin solutions in two-bottle tests. With some sugars (e.g., sucrose), flavor preferences are reinforced by both sweet taste and post-oral nutrient effects, whereas with other sugars (e.g., fructose), sweet taste is the primary reinforcer. Sucrose and fructose were used in three experiments to condition flavor preferences in one outbred (CD-1) and eight inbred strains which have "sensitive" (SWR/J, SJL/J, C57BL/10J, C57BL/6J) or "sub-sensitive" (DBA/2J, BALB/cJ, C3H/HeJ, 129P3/J) sweet taste receptors (T1R2/T1R3). Food-restricted mice of each strain were trained (1 h/day) to drink flavored 16% sucrose (CS+ 16S, Experiment 1), 16% fructose (CS+ 16F, Experiment 2) or 8% fructose+0.2% saccharin (CS+ 8F, Experiment 3) solutions on five alternate days and a differently flavored saccharin solution (0.05% or 0.2%, CS-) on the other five alternating days. The CS+ and CS- flavors were presented in 0.2% saccharin for two-bottle testing over six days. All strains preferred the CS+ 16S to CS- although there were significant strain differences in the magnitude and persistence of the sucrose preference. The strains also differed in the magnitude and persistence of preferences for the CS+ 16F and CS+ 8F flavors over the CS- with two strains failing to prefer the fructose-paired flavors. Sucrose conditioned stronger preferences than did fructose which is attributed to differences in the taste and post-oral actions of the sugars. These differential training intakes may not have influenced the sucrose-CFP because of the post-oral reinforcing actions of sucrose. Overall, sweet sensitive and sub-sensitive mice did not differ in sucrose-CFP, but unexpectedly, the sub-sensitive mice displayed stronger fructose-CFP. This may be related to differential training intakes of CS+ and CS- solutions: sweet sensitive mice consumed more CS- than CS+ during training while sub-sensitive mice consumed more CS+.

Indexed as

FructoseSucroseSweetening AgentsAnalysis of VarianceAnimalsConditioning, PsychologicalDose-Response Relationship, DrugFood PreferencesMaleMiceMice, Inbred StrainsReinforcement, PsychologyTasteFructoseSucroseSweetening Agents

Identifiers

PMID21945373
PMCPMC3225606
OpenAlexW2017009618

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.