Tongue Cooling: A New Reward for Thirsty Rodents

Mendelson, Joseph; Chillag, Dana

doi:10.1126/science.170.3965.1418

Cited by 99 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Once again, this behavior appeared to resemble scheduleinduced licking of the dry tube. Mendelson and Chillag (1970) reported that schedule-induced licking occurred when a cold closed stainless steel drinking tube was made available. The stainless steel water tube in the present study apparently assumed the same function.…”

Section: Drinking Contrast R-op3mentioning

confidence: 99%

Schedule-induced polydipsia contrast in the rat

Porter

Allen

1977

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Schedule-induced polydipsia was studied using a behavioral contrast paradigm. Food pellets were delivered to food-deprived rats on a response-independent FT l-min sehedule. Licking on a tube produeed water on a MULT FR 10 FR 10, MULT FR 10 EXT, or MIXED FR 10 EXT for three rats (Experiment 1) and on a MULT VI VI, MULT VI EXT, or MIXED VI EXT sehedule for three other rats (Experiment 2). On the FR sehedules, rats eould drink more water by inereasing lick rates, but on the VI schedules the amount of drinking was fixed by the sehedule parameters and was relatively unaffected by liek rates. Relative to MULT FR FR, positive polydipsia eontrast was clearly demonstrated on MULT and MIXED FR EXT; but relative to MULT VI VI, eontrast was not demonstrated on MULT and MIXED VI EXT. These data suggest that polydipsia eontrast oceurs only if inereased lieking permits inereased drinking.Several studies (Allen, Porter, & Arazie, 1975;Jacquet, 1972; Porter, Arazie, Holbrook, Cheek, & Allen, 1975) have reported contrast-like effects with schedule-induced polydipsia (Falk, 1969(Falk, , 1971. However, none employed the standard multiple schedule paradigm used to investigate behavioral contrast (see Reynolds, 1%1). Recently, demonstrated positive polydipsia contrast using a procedure analogous to the standard behavioral contrast design. Food pellets were delivered on a fixed-interval (FI) I-min schedule. Drinking was initially stabilized on a MUL T CRF CRF schedule (schedule components las ted 1 min), and when access to water was prevented in one component (MULT CRF EXT), drin king increased substantially in the unchanged component. When access to water was reinstated in the EXT component, drinking in the unchanged component decreased to previous levels.The study is subject to two criticisms. First, aleverpress response was required to deliver .1 ml of water in a water dipper, rather than the more direct response of licking a drinking tube. This method apparently did not constrain the development of schedule-induced polydipsia, since milliliter/pellet intake values were within previously reported ranges. Second, the water-reinforcement schedule (CRF) permitted the amount of water received by the rats to increase during the unchanged component. It might be argued that the increased water intake, rather than the contrast condition, accounted for the increased leverpress rates in the unchanged component. This was unlikely, since leverpress rates (and drinking magnitudes) retumed to baseline levels when the MUL T CRF CRF schedule was reinstated.The present study was designed to avoid these criticisms. In Experiment 1, licking was substituted for leverpressing as the response that produced water, and licking was reinforced by water delivery on a fixed-ratio (FR) 10 schedule. This low schedule value allowed the rats relatively unlimited access to water, and increases in water consumption could occur in the unchanged eomponent of the MULT schedule, as they had in the CRF component of the study. In Experiment 2, licking was reinforced...

show abstract

Section: Drinking Contrast R-op3mentioning

confidence: 99%

Schedule-induced polydipsia contrast in the rat

Porter

Allen

1977

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cold water reduces water intake during the short (less than 30 sec) bursts of drinking that occur on intermittent schedules of food reinforcement (Carlisle & Laudenslager, 1976). Similarly , the stomach clearance hypothesis does not explain why thirsty animals lick a cold, dry tube (Mendelson & Chillag , 1970) or air (Hendry & Rasche, 1961). These observations are consistent with the view that orolingual cooling alone has a satiating effect on thirst.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 55%

Temperature effects on thirst: Cutaneous or oral receptors?

Carlisle

1977

Psychobiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Water intake of rats was not greatly different as a function of the ambient temperature in which the water was consumed provided that the temperature of the water was maintained at 25°C. If water temperature was allowed to follow ambient temperature, then less water was consumed in cool environments. Thirst is modulated by receptors in or around the mouth and not in the skin.It is well-known that water intake varies directly with ambient temperature (Budgell, 1970;Hamilton, 1963), presumably as a consequence of afferent information from temperature receptors in the skin (Fitzsimons, 1972). There is now considerable evidence to show that water intake also varies directly with water temperature (Gold, Kapatos, Prowse, Quackenbush, & Oxford, 1973; Gold & Prowse, 1974; Kapatos & Gold, 1972). Unless independently controlled, the temperature of drinking water tends to follow variations in ambient temperature. Could the effect on water intake attributed to ambient temperature be due to the temperature of drinking water? If so, the appropriate receptor system mediating the modulation of water intake would be located in or around the mouth and not in the skin. This notion was tested in three experiments in which water temperature was controlled independently of ambient temperature. METHOD Animals and ApparatusSix adult female rats of the Sprague-Dawley strain with body weights of 211-263 g were kept in a colony room maintained at 23± 2°C and given access to water for 20 min each day in a Model 1316 Lehigh Valley test apparatus located in a 3 x 2.5 x 2.5 m temperature-controlled room . Purina Chow pellets were available ad lib except during each daily drinking test. Water temperature was controlled by circulating water from a constanttemperature bath to copper tubing wrapped around the metal spout of a drinking tube, the aperture of which was 4 mm outside a 1.8 x 3.2 em slot in the wall of the animal enclosure. The maximal variation in the temperature of drinking water during a test, as measured by a thermistor inside the drinking tube near the tip, was ± 1°C. Water intake was determined by reading the level of a calibrated buret to the nearest 0.1 mI. Pre-and posttest rectal temperature was measured with a Yellow Springs Instrument Co. Model 46 Telethermometer and small-animal probe inserted 6 ern. Two weeks of daily tests were given with neutral (25°C) water and ambient temperatures to assure stable intakes before the first experiment commenced. ProcedureIn the first experiment, the animals were given daily access to water of 25°C for 20 min at ambient temperatures which varied between 5°and 40°C in 5°C steps. One temperature was in effect each day. An ascending series of temperatures was given first, followed by a descending series so that each subject received two tests at each temperature. The second experiment provided water that was either controlled at 25°C or free to vary with ambient temperatures of 5°, 15°, 25°, or 35°C. Random presentations of the various combinations of ambient and water temperature were gi...

show abstract

“…If preference for water of a particular temperature were based on the presumably innately determined intrinsic action of cold water on tongue receptors (Mendelson & Chillag, 1970;Kapatos & Gold, 1972;Bartoshuk, 1972), the results of Experiment I would be expected to have shown a clear and consistent preference for cooler water in all animals. However, only when the rats were allowed to choose between 36° and 12°C water was the preference decisive.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

The temperature of ingested water: Preference for cold water as an associative response

Deaux

Engstrom

1973

Psychobiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

l 'hni,) log/('(}II'.lTlh()I')gl' 1'1;3, lui. I .. \(), 3. _'57·~M) The tenlperaturc of ingested water: Preference for cold water as an associative response* EDWARD DEAUX and ROBERT ENGSTROM Antioch Collef(e. Yellow Springs, Ohio 4538;' Rah \\Trl' found to prd'l'r 12 OVl'r 36''C water when their choice was restricted to those temperatures, but no clear prefl'rl' nl'c was shown bl·twecn water of 12° and 24°C or 24° and 36°C. The hypothesis that preference for cooler \\;Iter is based on the animals' history of drinking cooler water is supported by a successful shift to preferring 36°C \\a1l'r after n'stril'led e, \posure to that temperature for 15 days.

show abstract

Tongue Cooling: A New Reward for Thirsty Rodents

Cited by 99 publications

References 11 publications

Schedule-induced polydipsia contrast in the rat

Schedule-induced polydipsia contrast in the rat

Temperature effects on thirst: Cutaneous or oral receptors?

The temperature of ingested water: Preference for cold water as an associative response

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About