ArticleAmino acids2013
Enantiomer-specific selection of amino acids.
Article in Amino acids, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Dietary intake of L-amino acids impacts on several physiological functions, including the control of gastrointestinal motility, pancreatic secretion, and appetite. However, the biological mechanisms regulating behavioral predilections for certain amino acid types remain poorly understood. We tested the hypothesis that, in mice, the potency with which a given glucogenic amino acid increases glucose utilization reflects its rewarding properties. We have found that: (1) during long-, but not short-, term preference tests, L-alanine and L-serine were preferred over their D-enantiomer counterparts, while no such effect was observed for L-threonine vs. D-threonine; (2) these behavioral patterns were closely associated with the ability of L-amino acids to promote increases in respiratory exchange ratios such that those, and only those, L-amino acids able to promote increases in respiratory exchange ratios were preferred over their D-isomers; (3) these behavioral preferences were independent of gustatory influences, since taste-deficient Trpm5 knockout mice displayed ingestive responses very similar to those of their wild-type counterparts. We conclude that the ability to promote increases in respiratory exchange ratios enhances the reward value of nutritionally relevant amino acids and suggest a mechanistic link between substrate utilization and amino acid preferences.
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.