ArticlePhysiology & behavior2022
A new apparatus to analyze meal-related ingestive behaviors in rats fed a complex multi-food diet.
Article in Physiology & behavior, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transection of the glossopharyngeal nerve reduces energy and sugar intake but does not affect fat intake or meal patterns in rats offered a palatable cafeteria diet.Physiology & behavior · 2026Article
- Article
- The Nature of Available Choices Affects the Intake and Meal Patterns of Rats Offered a Palatable Cafeteria-Style Diet.Nutrients · 2023Article
- Chronic Semaglutide Treatment in Rats Leads to Daily Excessive Concentration-Dependent Sucrose Intake.Journal of the Endocrine Society · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The measurement of the size and timing of meals provides critical insight into the processes underlying food intake. While most work has been conducted with a single food or fluid, the availability of food choices can also influence eating and interact with these processes. The 5-Item Food Choice Monitor (FCM), a device that continuously measures eating and drinking behaviors of rats provided up to 5 foods and 2 fluids simultaneously, was designed to allow study of food choices simultaneously with meal patterns. To validate this device, adult male and female (n = 8 each) Sprague-Dawley rats were housed in the FCM. Food and fluid intake were measured continuously (22-h/day) while rats were presented water and powdered chow. Then a cafeteria diet of 5 foods varying in macronutrient content, texture, and flavors were offered along with water. Lastly, the 5 foods were offered along with 0.3 M sucrose and water. Analyses were conducted to find optimal criteria for parceling ingestive behavior into meals, and then meal patterns were quantified. Total intake, as assessed by FCM software, was in good concordance with that measured by an independent scale. A minimum meal size of 1 kcal and a meal termination criterion of 15-min accounted for >90% of total intake and produced meal dynamics that were in register with the literature. Use of the cafeteria diet allowed comparisons between meal patterns with a single food versus a multi-food diet, as well as analyses of macronutrient-related food choices across subsets of meals. The FCM proved to accurately measure food intake over a 22-h period and was able to detect differences and similarities in the meal patterns of rats as a function of sex and food choice availability. Combined with any number of experimental manipulations, the FCM holds great promise in the investigation of the physiological and neural controls of ingestive behavior in a dietary environment that allows food choices, more closely emulating human eating conditions.
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.