ArticlePhysiology & behavior2024
Glucose appetition in C57BL/6J mice: Influence of nonnutritive sweetener experience, food deprivation state and sex differences.
Article in Physiology & behavior, 2024. 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.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In addition to its sweet taste, glucose has potent and rapid postoral actions (appetition) that enhance its reward value. This has been demonstrated by the experience-induced preference for glucose over initially preferred nonnutritive sweetener solutions in 24-h choice tests. However, some sweetener solutions (e.g., 0.8% sucralose) have inhibitory postoral actions that may exaggerate glucose appetition whereas others (e.g., 0.1% sucralose + 0.1% saccharin, S+S) do not. Experiment 1 revealed that food-restricted (FR) male C57BL/6J mice displayed similar rapid glucose appetition effects (stimulation of glucose licking within minutes) and conditioned flavor preferences following 1-h experience with flavored 0.8% sucralose or 0.1% S+S and 8% glucose solutions. Thus, the inhibitory effects of 0.8% sucralose observed in 24-h tests were not apparent in 1-h tests. Experiment 2 evaluated the effects of food deprivation state and sweetener concentration on glucose appetition in female mice. Unlike FR mice tested with 0.1% S+S and 8% glucose, ad libitum (AL) fed mice displayed no stimulation of 8% glucose licking in the 1-h tests. A second ad libitum group (AL) tested with 0.2% S+S and 16% glucose solutions displayed stimulation of 16% glucose licking by the third 1-h test. Both AL groups, like the FR group, developed a preference for the glucose-paired flavor over the S+S paired flavor. Thus, food restriction promotes increased glucose licking but is not required for a conditioned preference. The FR male mice (Exp. 1) and FR female mice (Exp. 2) showed similar appetition responses (licking stimulation and flavor preference) to 8% glucose.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.