ArticleAmerican journal of physiology. Regulatory, integrative and comparative physiology2025
Gustatory and olfactory-guided responsiveness to maltodextrin solutions in mice.
Article in American journal of physiology. Regulatory, integrative and comparative physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Targeting sweet taste receptor T1R2/T1R3: a new strategy for metabolic disease regulation and intervention of multiple organ diseases.Food chemistry. Molecular sciences · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Rodents avidly consume maltodextrin solutions. Oligosaccharides appear to generate a detectable oral perception distinct from basic tastes in rodents and humans. Mice lacking one or both subunits of the T1R2 + T1R3 heterodimer still display relatively normal preference for maltodextrins but have severely blunted responsiveness to sugars. To test whether taste contributes to maltodextrin responsiveness, we performed lingual gustatory nerve transection (NX) in mice with [wild-type (WT)] and without [knockout (KO)] functional T1R3 subunits. Mice were then tested, after a ∼23-h fast, for concentration-dependent licking responses to Maltrin, a maltodextrin, and sucrose in a brief-access paradigm, which minimizes postingestive influences on responsiveness. Compared with SHAM mice, NX mice displayed blunted lick responses and initiated fewer trials to Maltrin. The KO mice exhibited some concentration-dependent licking to sucrose, though attenuated, which may be due to flavor-nutrient learning across sessions. However, NX blunted this responsiveness in all mice. The results suggest that an intact chorda tympani and/or glossopharyngeal nerve(s) is required for normal licking to maltodextrin and sucrose solutions, confirming a contribution of gustatory signals to behavior. A follow-up experiment tested whether olfactory signals contribute to Maltrin detection in mice trained in a Go/No-Go task. Mice could detect the volatiles associated with Maltrin in a concentration-dependent manner. As maltodextrins have negligible vapor pressure, mice are likely responding to volatile contaminants within the solution, which could potentially serve as cues for flavor-nutrient conditioning. Nevertheless, there is clearly a gustatory component that unconditionally drives hedonic responsiveness to this stimulus.
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.