With respect to feeding, insulin is typically thought of as a satiety hormone, acting in the hypothalamus to limit ingestive behavior. However, accumulating evidence suggests that insulin also has the ability to alter dopamine release in the striatum and influence food preferences. With increased access to high calorie foods, Western societies have a high prevalence of obesity, accompanied by insulin insensitivity. Little is known about how insulin is trafficked into the brain following food consumption and whether insulin insensitivity in the periphery is mirrored in the central nervous system. We investigated insulin receptor activation in the ventral striatum of rats receiving water or 16% glucose either orally or intragastrically. We also investigated whether glucose-induced insulin receptor activation was altered in food-restricted (FR) or diet-induced obesity (OB) rat models. Lastly, we examined whether insulin plays a significant role in flavor-nutrient preference learning. Glucose intake stimulated a rapid increase in insulin receptor activity in the ventral striatum of FR and ad libitum (AL) fed rats, but not OB rats. Similarly, both AL and FR, but not OB rats demonstrated significant flavor-nutrient preferences. However AL rats receiving brief inhibition of insulin activity during conditioning failed to acquire a significant flavor-nutrient preference. These findings suggest that impaired insulin receptor activation in the ventral striatum may result in inaccurate valuation of nutritive foods, which could lead to overconsumption of food or the selection of foods that don't accurately meet the body's current physiological needs.

No abstract

Sugar appetite is influenced by unlearned and learned preferences in rodents. The present study examined whether dopamine (DA) D1 (SCH23390: SCH) and opioid (naltrexone: NTX) receptor antagonists differentially altered the expression and acquisition of fructose-conditioned flavor preferences (CFP) in BALB/c and SWR mice. In expression experiments, food-restricted mice alternately (10 sessions, 1 h) consumed a flavored (e.g., cherry) 8% fructose + 0.2% saccharin solution (CS+) and a differently-flavored (e.g., grape) 0.2% saccharin solution (CS−). Two-bottle CS choice tests (1 h) occurred 0.5 h following vehicle, SCH (200 or 800 nmol/kg) or NTX (1 or 5 mg/kg). SCH, but not NTX significantly reduced CS+ preference in both strains. In acquisition experiments, 0.5 h prior to 10 acquisition training sessions, vehicle, SCH (50 nmol/kg), NTX (1 mg/kg) or Limited Control vehicle treatments were administered, followed by two-bottle CS choice tests without injections. SCH and NTX reduced training intakes in both strains. BALB/c mice displayed hastened extinction of the fructose-CFP following training with SCH, but not NTX. SCH eliminated fructose-CFP acquisition in SWR mice, whereas NTX hastened extinction of the CFP. These results are compared to previous drug findings obtained with sucrose-CFP in SWR and BALB/c mice, and are discussed in terms of differential effects of these sugars on oral and post-oral conditioning.

No abstract

Recent studies indicate that C57BL/6J (B6) and FVB inbred mouse strains differ in post-oral fructose conditioning. This was demonstrated by their differential flavor conditioning response to intragastric fructose and their preference for fructose versus a non-nutritive sweetener. The present study extended this analysis to SWR and BALB/c inbred strains which are of interest because they both show robust flavor conditioning responses to fructose. In the first experiment, ad-libitum fed mice were given a series of 2-day, two-bottle preference tests between 8% fructose and a more preferred, but non-nutritive 0.1% sucralose +0.1% saccharin (S + S) solution (tests 1 & 4), and fructose or S + S versus water (tests 2 and 3). In test 1, SWR mice preferred S + S to fructose, and in tests 2 and 3, they preferred both sweeteners to water. In test 4, SWR mice switched their preference and consumed more fructose than S + S. In contrast, ad-libitum fed BALB/c mice strongly preferred S + S to fructose in both tests 1 and 4, although they preferred both sweeteners to water in tests 2 and 3. Food-restricted BALB/c mice also preferred the non-nutritive S + S to fructose in tests 1 and 4. The experience-induced fructose preference reversal observed in SWR, but not BALB/c mice indicates that fructose has a post-oral reinforcing effect in SWR mice as in FVB mice. Because B6 and FVB mice prefer glucose to fructose based on the post-oral actions of the two sugars, the second experiment compared the preferences of SWR and BALB/c mice for 8% glucose and fructose solutions. Ad-libitum fed and food-restricted SWR mice strongly preferred glucose to fructose. In contrast, ad-libitum fed BALB/c mice were indifferent to the sugars, perhaps because of their overall low intakes. Food-restricted BALB/c mice, however, strongly preferred glucose. These findings indicate that SWR and BALB/c mice differ in their preference response to the post-oral actions of fructose.