Gastric bypass in rats does not decrease appetitive behavior towards sweet or fatty fluids despite blunting preferential intake of sugar and fat

Clare M Mathes, Ryan A Bohnenkamp, Ginger D Blonde, Chanel Letourneau, Caroline Corteville, Marco Bueter, Thomas A Lutz, Carel W le Roux, Alan C Spector, Clare M Mathes, Ryan A Bohnenkamp, Ginger D Blonde, Chanel Letourneau, Caroline Corteville, Marco Bueter, Thomas A Lutz, Carel W le Roux, Alan C Spector

Abstract

After Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) surgery, patients report consuming fewer fatty and dessert-like foods, and rats display blunted sugar and fat preferences. Here we used a progressive ratio (PR) task in our rat model to explicitly test whether RYGB decreases the willingness of rats to work for very small amounts of preferred sugar- and/or fat-containing fluids. In each of two studies, two groups of rats - one maintained on a high-fat diet (HFD) and standard chow (CHOW) and one given CHOW alone - were trained while water-deprived to work for water or either Ensure or 1.0M sucrose on increasingly difficult operant schedules. When tested before surgery while nondeprived, HFD rats had lower PR breakpoints (number of operant responses in the last reinforced ratio) for sucrose, but not for Ensure, than CHOW rats. After surgery, at no time did rats given RYGB show lower breakpoints than SHAM rats for Ensure, sucrose, or when 5% Intralipid served postoperatively as the reinforcer. Nevertheless, RYGB rats showed blunted preferences for these caloric fluids versus water in 2-bottle preference tests. Importantly, although the Intralipid and sucrose preferences of RYGB rats decreased further over time, subsequent breakpoints for them were not significantly impacted. Collectively, these data suggest that the observed lower preferences for normally palatable fluids after RYGB in rats may reflect a learned adjustment to altered postingestive feedback rather than a dampening of the reinforcing taste characteristics of such stimuli as measured by the PR task in which postingestive stimulation is negligible.

Keywords: Bariatric surgery; Motivation; Operant behavior; Progressive ratio; Reward.

Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Three-day median ± semi-interquartile range breakpoint of rats fed either a high-fat diet and standard laboratory chow (HFD) or standard laboratory chow alone (CHOW) before surgery (A) or after being given either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery (RYGB) or a sham operation (SHAM) (B) when performing for Ensure on a progressive ratio (PR) schedule. Rats that were given the HFD choice and that received RYGB had higher breakpoints than did HFD-SHAM rats. At no time did breakpoints differ based on maintenance diet. * represents p

Figure 2

Three-day median ± semi-interquartile range…

Figure 2

Three-day median ± semi-interquartile range breakpoint of rats fed either a high-fat diet…

Figure 2
Three-day median ± semi-interquartile range breakpoint of rats fed either a high-fat diet and standard laboratory chow (HFD) or standard laboratory chow alone (CHOW) and after being given either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery (RYGB) or a sham operation (SHAM) when performing for 5% Intralipid (IL) on a progressive ratio (PR) 10 (A) or 3 schedule either before (B) or after (C) a 96-h 2-bottle preference test (IL vs. water). Rats that were given the HFD choice and that received RYGB had higher breakpoints than did HFD-SHAM rats but only during PR3 testing prior to the 2-bottle preference test. At no time did breakpoints differ based on maintenance diet. * represents p

Figure 3

Mean ± standard error percent…

Figure 3

Mean ± standard error percent preference for Ensure (ENS) during a 96-h 2-bottle…

Figure 3
Mean ± standard error percent preference for Ensure (ENS) during a 96-h 2-bottle preference test (ENS vs. water, divided in to two 48-h blocks) of rats fed either a high-fat diet and standard laboratory chow (HFD) or standard laboratory chow alone (CHOW) and given either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery (RYGB) or a sham operation (SHAM). Rats that received RYGB and were fed CHOW alone showed lower ENS preferences relative to CHOW-SHAM rats, but still maintained preferences greater than 50%. Further, the preference of both RYGB groups remained stable across blocks. Rats fed CHOW and given SHAM showed higher overall preferences of ENS than HFD-SHAM, but there was no such difference between CHOW-RYGB and HFD-RYGB rats. * represents p

Figure 4

Mean ± standard error percent…

Figure 4

Mean ± standard error percent preference for 5% Intralipid (IL) during a 96-h…

Figure 4
Mean ± standard error percent preference for 5% Intralipid (IL) during a 96-h 2-bottle preference test (IL vs. water, divided in to two 48-h blocks) of rats fed either a high-fat diet and standard laboratory chow (HFD) or standard laboratory chow alone (CHOW) and given either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery (RYGB) or a sham operation (SHAM). Rats that received RYGB and were fed CHOW alone showed lower IL preferences relative to CHOW-SHAM rats (* represents p

Figure 5

Two to three-day median ±…

Figure 5

Two to three-day median ± semi-interquartile range breakpoint of rats fed standard laboratory…

Figure 5
Two to three-day median ± semi-interquartile range breakpoint of rats fed standard laboratory chow (CHOW) when performing for 1.0 M sucrose (SUC) on a progressive ratio (PR) schedule prior to (A) or after either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or sham (SHAM) surgery (B). At no time did breakpoint differ between surgical groups. When the rats were tested while food-deprived (D), their breakpoints were greater than when they were tested nondeprived (C).

Figure 6

Mean ± standard error percent…

Figure 6

Mean ± standard error percent preference for 1.0 M sucrose (SUC) during a…

Figure 6
Mean ± standard error percent preference for 1.0 M sucrose (SUC) during a 96-h 2-bottle preference test (SUC vs. water, divided in to two 48-h blocks) of rats fed standard laboratory chow and given either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery (RYGB) or a sham operation (SHAM). Rats that received RYGB showed lower SUC preferences relative to SHAM rats on both blocks of testing (* represents p
Similar articles
Cited by
References
    1. O’Brien PE. Bariatric surgery: mechanisms, indications and outcomes. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;25(8):1358–1365. - PubMed
    1. Sjöström L, Narbro K, Sjöström CD, Karason K, Larsson B, Wedel H, Lystig T, Sullivan M, Bouchard C, Carlsson B, Bengtsson C, Dahlgren S, Gummesson A, Jacobson P, Karlsson J, Lindroos AK, Lönroth H, Näslund I, Olbers T, Stenlöf K, Torgerson J, Agren G, Carlsson LM Swedish Obese Subjects Study. Effects of bariatric surgery on mortality in Swedish obese subjects. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(8):741–752. - PubMed
    1. Tadross JA, le Roux CW. The mechanisms of weight loss after bariatric surgery. Int J Obes. 2009;33(S1):S28–S32. - PubMed
    1. Brolin RE, Robertson LB, Kenler HA, Cody RP. Weight loss and dietary intake after vertical banded gastroplasty and roux-en-y gastric bypass. An Surg. 1994;220(6):782–790. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brown EK, Settle EA, Van Rij AM. Food intake patterns of gastric bypass patients. J Am Diet Assoc. 1982;80(5):437–443. - PubMed
Show all 46 references
Publication types
MeSH terms
[x]
Cite
Copy Download .nbib
Format: AMA APA MLA NLM

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

Follow NCBI
Figure 2
Figure 2
Three-day median ± semi-interquartile range breakpoint of rats fed either a high-fat diet and standard laboratory chow (HFD) or standard laboratory chow alone (CHOW) and after being given either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery (RYGB) or a sham operation (SHAM) when performing for 5% Intralipid (IL) on a progressive ratio (PR) 10 (A) or 3 schedule either before (B) or after (C) a 96-h 2-bottle preference test (IL vs. water). Rats that were given the HFD choice and that received RYGB had higher breakpoints than did HFD-SHAM rats but only during PR3 testing prior to the 2-bottle preference test. At no time did breakpoints differ based on maintenance diet. * represents p

Figure 3

Mean ± standard error percent…

Figure 3

Mean ± standard error percent preference for Ensure (ENS) during a 96-h 2-bottle…

Figure 3
Mean ± standard error percent preference for Ensure (ENS) during a 96-h 2-bottle preference test (ENS vs. water, divided in to two 48-h blocks) of rats fed either a high-fat diet and standard laboratory chow (HFD) or standard laboratory chow alone (CHOW) and given either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery (RYGB) or a sham operation (SHAM). Rats that received RYGB and were fed CHOW alone showed lower ENS preferences relative to CHOW-SHAM rats, but still maintained preferences greater than 50%. Further, the preference of both RYGB groups remained stable across blocks. Rats fed CHOW and given SHAM showed higher overall preferences of ENS than HFD-SHAM, but there was no such difference between CHOW-RYGB and HFD-RYGB rats. * represents p

Figure 4

Mean ± standard error percent…

Figure 4

Mean ± standard error percent preference for 5% Intralipid (IL) during a 96-h…

Figure 4
Mean ± standard error percent preference for 5% Intralipid (IL) during a 96-h 2-bottle preference test (IL vs. water, divided in to two 48-h blocks) of rats fed either a high-fat diet and standard laboratory chow (HFD) or standard laboratory chow alone (CHOW) and given either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery (RYGB) or a sham operation (SHAM). Rats that received RYGB and were fed CHOW alone showed lower IL preferences relative to CHOW-SHAM rats (* represents p

Figure 5

Two to three-day median ±…

Figure 5

Two to three-day median ± semi-interquartile range breakpoint of rats fed standard laboratory…

Figure 5
Two to three-day median ± semi-interquartile range breakpoint of rats fed standard laboratory chow (CHOW) when performing for 1.0 M sucrose (SUC) on a progressive ratio (PR) schedule prior to (A) or after either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or sham (SHAM) surgery (B). At no time did breakpoint differ between surgical groups. When the rats were tested while food-deprived (D), their breakpoints were greater than when they were tested nondeprived (C).

Figure 6

Mean ± standard error percent…

Figure 6

Mean ± standard error percent preference for 1.0 M sucrose (SUC) during a…

Figure 6
Mean ± standard error percent preference for 1.0 M sucrose (SUC) during a 96-h 2-bottle preference test (SUC vs. water, divided in to two 48-h blocks) of rats fed standard laboratory chow and given either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery (RYGB) or a sham operation (SHAM). Rats that received RYGB showed lower SUC preferences relative to SHAM rats on both blocks of testing (* represents p
Similar articles
Cited by
References
    1. O’Brien PE. Bariatric surgery: mechanisms, indications and outcomes. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;25(8):1358–1365. - PubMed
    1. Sjöström L, Narbro K, Sjöström CD, Karason K, Larsson B, Wedel H, Lystig T, Sullivan M, Bouchard C, Carlsson B, Bengtsson C, Dahlgren S, Gummesson A, Jacobson P, Karlsson J, Lindroos AK, Lönroth H, Näslund I, Olbers T, Stenlöf K, Torgerson J, Agren G, Carlsson LM Swedish Obese Subjects Study. Effects of bariatric surgery on mortality in Swedish obese subjects. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(8):741–752. - PubMed
    1. Tadross JA, le Roux CW. The mechanisms of weight loss after bariatric surgery. Int J Obes. 2009;33(S1):S28–S32. - PubMed
    1. Brolin RE, Robertson LB, Kenler HA, Cody RP. Weight loss and dietary intake after vertical banded gastroplasty and roux-en-y gastric bypass. An Surg. 1994;220(6):782–790. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brown EK, Settle EA, Van Rij AM. Food intake patterns of gastric bypass patients. J Am Diet Assoc. 1982;80(5):437–443. - PubMed
Show all 46 references
Publication types
MeSH terms
[x]
Cite
Copy Download .nbib
Format: AMA APA MLA NLM

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

Follow NCBI
Figure 3
Figure 3
Mean ± standard error percent preference for Ensure (ENS) during a 96-h 2-bottle preference test (ENS vs. water, divided in to two 48-h blocks) of rats fed either a high-fat diet and standard laboratory chow (HFD) or standard laboratory chow alone (CHOW) and given either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery (RYGB) or a sham operation (SHAM). Rats that received RYGB and were fed CHOW alone showed lower ENS preferences relative to CHOW-SHAM rats, but still maintained preferences greater than 50%. Further, the preference of both RYGB groups remained stable across blocks. Rats fed CHOW and given SHAM showed higher overall preferences of ENS than HFD-SHAM, but there was no such difference between CHOW-RYGB and HFD-RYGB rats. * represents p

Figure 4

Mean ± standard error percent…

Figure 4

Mean ± standard error percent preference for 5% Intralipid (IL) during a 96-h…

Figure 4
Mean ± standard error percent preference for 5% Intralipid (IL) during a 96-h 2-bottle preference test (IL vs. water, divided in to two 48-h blocks) of rats fed either a high-fat diet and standard laboratory chow (HFD) or standard laboratory chow alone (CHOW) and given either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery (RYGB) or a sham operation (SHAM). Rats that received RYGB and were fed CHOW alone showed lower IL preferences relative to CHOW-SHAM rats (* represents p

Figure 5

Two to three-day median ±…

Figure 5

Two to three-day median ± semi-interquartile range breakpoint of rats fed standard laboratory…

Figure 5
Two to three-day median ± semi-interquartile range breakpoint of rats fed standard laboratory chow (CHOW) when performing for 1.0 M sucrose (SUC) on a progressive ratio (PR) schedule prior to (A) or after either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or sham (SHAM) surgery (B). At no time did breakpoint differ between surgical groups. When the rats were tested while food-deprived (D), their breakpoints were greater than when they were tested nondeprived (C).

Figure 6

Mean ± standard error percent…

Figure 6

Mean ± standard error percent preference for 1.0 M sucrose (SUC) during a…

Figure 6
Mean ± standard error percent preference for 1.0 M sucrose (SUC) during a 96-h 2-bottle preference test (SUC vs. water, divided in to two 48-h blocks) of rats fed standard laboratory chow and given either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery (RYGB) or a sham operation (SHAM). Rats that received RYGB showed lower SUC preferences relative to SHAM rats on both blocks of testing (* represents p
Similar articles
Cited by
References
    1. O’Brien PE. Bariatric surgery: mechanisms, indications and outcomes. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;25(8):1358–1365. - PubMed
    1. Sjöström L, Narbro K, Sjöström CD, Karason K, Larsson B, Wedel H, Lystig T, Sullivan M, Bouchard C, Carlsson B, Bengtsson C, Dahlgren S, Gummesson A, Jacobson P, Karlsson J, Lindroos AK, Lönroth H, Näslund I, Olbers T, Stenlöf K, Torgerson J, Agren G, Carlsson LM Swedish Obese Subjects Study. Effects of bariatric surgery on mortality in Swedish obese subjects. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(8):741–752. - PubMed
    1. Tadross JA, le Roux CW. The mechanisms of weight loss after bariatric surgery. Int J Obes. 2009;33(S1):S28–S32. - PubMed
    1. Brolin RE, Robertson LB, Kenler HA, Cody RP. Weight loss and dietary intake after vertical banded gastroplasty and roux-en-y gastric bypass. An Surg. 1994;220(6):782–790. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brown EK, Settle EA, Van Rij AM. Food intake patterns of gastric bypass patients. J Am Diet Assoc. 1982;80(5):437–443. - PubMed
Show all 46 references
Publication types
MeSH terms
[x]
Cite
Copy Download .nbib
Format: AMA APA MLA NLM

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

Follow NCBI
Figure 4
Figure 4
Mean ± standard error percent preference for 5% Intralipid (IL) during a 96-h 2-bottle preference test (IL vs. water, divided in to two 48-h blocks) of rats fed either a high-fat diet and standard laboratory chow (HFD) or standard laboratory chow alone (CHOW) and given either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery (RYGB) or a sham operation (SHAM). Rats that received RYGB and were fed CHOW alone showed lower IL preferences relative to CHOW-SHAM rats (* represents p

Figure 5

Two to three-day median ±…

Figure 5

Two to three-day median ± semi-interquartile range breakpoint of rats fed standard laboratory…

Figure 5
Two to three-day median ± semi-interquartile range breakpoint of rats fed standard laboratory chow (CHOW) when performing for 1.0 M sucrose (SUC) on a progressive ratio (PR) schedule prior to (A) or after either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or sham (SHAM) surgery (B). At no time did breakpoint differ between surgical groups. When the rats were tested while food-deprived (D), their breakpoints were greater than when they were tested nondeprived (C).

Figure 6

Mean ± standard error percent…

Figure 6

Mean ± standard error percent preference for 1.0 M sucrose (SUC) during a…

Figure 6
Mean ± standard error percent preference for 1.0 M sucrose (SUC) during a 96-h 2-bottle preference test (SUC vs. water, divided in to two 48-h blocks) of rats fed standard laboratory chow and given either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery (RYGB) or a sham operation (SHAM). Rats that received RYGB showed lower SUC preferences relative to SHAM rats on both blocks of testing (* represents p
Similar articles
Cited by
References
    1. O’Brien PE. Bariatric surgery: mechanisms, indications and outcomes. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;25(8):1358–1365. - PubMed
    1. Sjöström L, Narbro K, Sjöström CD, Karason K, Larsson B, Wedel H, Lystig T, Sullivan M, Bouchard C, Carlsson B, Bengtsson C, Dahlgren S, Gummesson A, Jacobson P, Karlsson J, Lindroos AK, Lönroth H, Näslund I, Olbers T, Stenlöf K, Torgerson J, Agren G, Carlsson LM Swedish Obese Subjects Study. Effects of bariatric surgery on mortality in Swedish obese subjects. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(8):741–752. - PubMed
    1. Tadross JA, le Roux CW. The mechanisms of weight loss after bariatric surgery. Int J Obes. 2009;33(S1):S28–S32. - PubMed
    1. Brolin RE, Robertson LB, Kenler HA, Cody RP. Weight loss and dietary intake after vertical banded gastroplasty and roux-en-y gastric bypass. An Surg. 1994;220(6):782–790. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brown EK, Settle EA, Van Rij AM. Food intake patterns of gastric bypass patients. J Am Diet Assoc. 1982;80(5):437–443. - PubMed
Show all 46 references
Publication types
MeSH terms
[x]
Cite
Copy Download .nbib
Format: AMA APA MLA NLM
Figure 5
Figure 5
Two to three-day median ± semi-interquartile range breakpoint of rats fed standard laboratory chow (CHOW) when performing for 1.0 M sucrose (SUC) on a progressive ratio (PR) schedule prior to (A) or after either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or sham (SHAM) surgery (B). At no time did breakpoint differ between surgical groups. When the rats were tested while food-deprived (D), their breakpoints were greater than when they were tested nondeprived (C).
Figure 6
Figure 6
Mean ± standard error percent preference for 1.0 M sucrose (SUC) during a 96-h 2-bottle preference test (SUC vs. water, divided in to two 48-h blocks) of rats fed standard laboratory chow and given either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery (RYGB) or a sham operation (SHAM). Rats that received RYGB showed lower SUC preferences relative to SHAM rats on both blocks of testing (* represents p

References

    1. O’Brien PE. Bariatric surgery: mechanisms, indications and outcomes. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;25(8):1358–1365.
    1. Sjöström L, Narbro K, Sjöström CD, Karason K, Larsson B, Wedel H, Lystig T, Sullivan M, Bouchard C, Carlsson B, Bengtsson C, Dahlgren S, Gummesson A, Jacobson P, Karlsson J, Lindroos AK, Lönroth H, Näslund I, Olbers T, Stenlöf K, Torgerson J, Agren G, Carlsson LM Swedish Obese Subjects Study. Effects of bariatric surgery on mortality in Swedish obese subjects. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(8):741–752.
    1. Tadross JA, le Roux CW. The mechanisms of weight loss after bariatric surgery. Int J Obes. 2009;33(S1):S28–S32.
    1. Brolin RE, Robertson LB, Kenler HA, Cody RP. Weight loss and dietary intake after vertical banded gastroplasty and roux-en-y gastric bypass. An Surg. 1994;220(6):782–790.
    1. Brown EK, Settle EA, Van Rij AM. Food intake patterns of gastric bypass patients. J Am Diet Assoc. 1982;80(5):437–443.
    1. Kenler HA, Brolin RE, Cody RP. Changes in eating behavior after horizontal gastroplasty and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Am J Clin Nutr. 1990;52(1):87–92.
    1. Kruseman M, Leimgruber A, Zumbach F, Golay A. Dietary, weight, and psychological changes among patients with obesity, 8 years after gastric bypass. J Am Diet Assoc. 2010;110(4):527–534.
    1. Laurenius A, Larsson I, Melanson KJ, Lindroos AK, Lonrth H, Bosaeus I, Olbers T. Decreased energy density and changes in food selection following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2013;67(2):168–173.
    1. le Roux CW, Bueter M, Theis N, Werling M, Ashradian H, Lowenstein C, Athanasiou T, Bloom SR, Spector AC, Olbers T, Lutz TA. Gastric bypass reduces fat intake and preference. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. 2011;301(4):R1057–R1066.
    1. Sugerman HJ, Starkey JV, Birkenhauser R. A randomized prospective trial of gastric bypass versus vertical banded gastroplasty for morbid obesity and their effects on sweets versus non-sweets eaters. Ann Surg. 1987;205(6):613–622.
    1. Schoeller DA. Limitations in the assessment of dietary energy intake by self-report. Metabolism. 1995;44:18–22.
    1. Hills RJ, Davies PS. The validity of self-reported energy intake as determined using the doubly labeled water technique. Br J Nutr. 2001;85:415–430.
    1. Trabulsi J, Schoeller DA. Evaluation of dietary assessment instruments against doubly labeled water, a biomarker of habitual energy intake. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2001;281 E891-E8911.
    1. Schoeller DA. Validation of habitual energy intake. Public Health Nutr. 2002;5:883–888.
    1. Livingstone MB, Black AE. Markers of the validity of reported energy intake. J Nutr. 2003;133(Suppl 3):895–920.
    1. Mathes CM, Spector AC. Food selection and taste changes in humans after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a direct-measures approach. Physiol Behav. 2012;107(4):476–483.
    1. Bueter M, Abegg K, Seyfried F, Lutz TA, le Roux CW. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in rats. J Vis Exp. 2012;64:e3940.
    1. Seyfried F, Miras AD, Bueter M, Prechtl CG, Spector AC, le Roux CW. Effects of preoperative exposure to a high-fat versus a low-fat diet on ingestive behavior after gastric bypass surgery in rats. Surg Endos. 2013;27(11):4192–4201.
    1. Zheng H, Shin AC, Lenard NR, Townsend RL, Patterson LM, Sigalet DL, Berthoud HR. Meal patterns, satiety, and food choice in a rat model of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. 2009;297(5):R1273–R1282.
    1. Shin AC, Zheng H, Pistell PJ, Berthoud HR. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery changes food reward in rats. Int J Obes (Lond) 2011;35(5):642–651.
    1. Saeidi N, Nestoridi E, Kucharczyk J, Uygun MK, Yarmush ML, Stylopoulos N. Sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass exhibit differential effects on food preferences, nutrient absorbtion and energy expenditure in rats. Int J Obes. 2012;36(11):1396–1402.
    1. Bueter M, Miras AD, Chichger H, Fenske W, Ghatei MA, Bloom SR, Unwin RJ, Lutz TA, Spector AC, le Roux CW. Alterations of sucrose preference after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Physiol Behav. 2011;104(5):709–721.
    1. Chelikani PK, Shah IH, Taqi E, Sigalet DL, Koopmans HH. Comparison of the effects of Rpoux-en-Y gastric bypass and ileal transposition surgeries on food intake, body weight, and circulating peptide YY concentrations in rats. Obes Surg. 2010;20(9):1281–1288.
    1. Smith GP. The direct and indirect controls of meal size. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 1996;20(1):41–46.
    1. Hodos W. Progressive ratio as a measure of reward strength. Science. 1961;134(3483):943–944.
    1. Miras AD, Jackson RN, Jackson SN, Goldstone AP, Olbers T, Hackenberg T, Spector AC, le Roux CW. Gastric bypass surgery for obesity decreases the reward value of a sweet-fat stimulus as assessed in a progressive ratio task. Am J Clin Nutr. 2012;96(3):467–473.
    1. Hajnal A, Acharya NK, Grigson PS, Cosava M, Twining RC. Obese OLETF rats exhibit increased operant performance for palatable sucrose solutions and differential sensitivity to D2 receptor antagonism. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. 2007;293:R1846–R1854.
    1. Mathes CM, Gregson JR, Spector AC. The selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor paroxetine decreases breakpoint of rats engaging in a progressive ratio licking task for sucrose and quinine solutions. Chem Sens. 2013;38(3):211–220.
    1. McGregor IS, Saharov T, Hunt GE, Topple AN. Beer consumption in rats: the influence of ethanol content, food deprivation, and cocaine. Alcohol. 1999;17:47–56.
    1. Reilly S. Reinforcement value of gustatory stimuli determined by progressive ratio performance. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 1999;63(2):301–311.
    1. Sclafani A, Ackroff K. Reinforcement value of sucrose measures by progressive ratio operant licking in the rat. Physiol Behav. 2002;79:663–670.
    1. Smith JC. The history of the “Davis Rig”. Appetite. 2001;36(1):93–98.
    1. Mathes CM, Bueter M, Smith KR, Lutz TA, le Roux CW, Spector AC. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in rats increases sucrose taste-related motivated behavior independent of pharmacological GLP-1 receptor modulation. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. 2011;302(6):R751–R767.
    1. Lacy RT, Hord LL, Morgan AJ, Harrod SB. Intravenous gestational nicotine exposure results in increased motivation for sucrose reward in adult rat offspring. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2012;124(3):299–306.
    1. Kosten TA. Pharmacologically targeting the P2rx4 gene on maintenance and reinstatement of alcohol self-administration in rats. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2011;98(4):533–538.
    1. Olarte-Sanchez CM, Valencia-Torres L, Cassaday HJ, Bradshaw CM, Szabadi E. Effects of SKF-83566 and haloperidol on performance on progressive ratio schedules maintained by sucrose and corn oil reinforcement: quantitative analysis using a new model derived from the Mathematical Principles of Reinforcement (MPR) Psychopharmacology. 2013;230(4):617–630.
    1. Liang NC, Freet CS, Grigson PS, Norgran R. Pontine and thalamic influences on fluid rewards: I. Operant responding for sucrose and corn oil. Physiol Behav. 2012;105(2):576–588.
    1. Brianna Sheppard A, Gross SC, Pavelka SA, Hall MJ, Palmatier MI. Caffeine increases the motivation to obtain non-drug reinforcers in rats. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2012;124(3):216–222.
    1. Davis JF, Tracy AL, Schurdak JD, Tschop MH, Lipton JW, Clegg DJ, Benoit SC. Exposure to elevated levels of dietary fat attenuates psychostimulant reward and mesolimbic dopamine turnover in the rat. Behav Neurosci. 2008;122(6):1257–1263.
    1. Finger BC, Dinan TG, Cryan JF. Diet-induced obesity blunts the behavioural effects of ghrelin: studies in a mouse progressive ratio task. Psychopharmacol. 2012;220(1):173–181.
    1. Figlewicz DP, Bennett JL, Naleid AM, Davis C, Grimm JW. Intraventricular insulin and leptin decrease sucrose self-administration in rats. Physiol Behav. 2006;89(4):611–616.
    1. la Fluer SE, Vanderschuren LJ, Luijendijk MC, Kloeze BM, Tiesjema B, Adan RA. A reciprocal interaction between food-motivated behavior and diet-induced obesity. Int J Obes. 2007;31(8):1286–1294.
    1. Figlewicz DP, Jay JL, Acheson MA, Magrisso IJ, West CH, Zayosh A, Benoit SC, Davis JF. Moderate high fat diet increases sucrose self-administration in young rats. Appetite. 2013;61(1):19–29.
    1. Wilson-Perez HE, Chambers AP, Sandoval DA, Stefater MA, Woods SC, Benoit SC, Seeley RJ. The effect of vertical sleeve gastrectomy on food choice in rats. Int J Obes. 2013;37(2):288–295.
    1. Pelchat ML, Grill HJ, Rozin P, Jacobs J. Quality of acquired responses to tates by Rattus norvegicus dependes on type of associated discomfort. J Comp Psychol. 1983;97:140–153.
    1. Parker LA. Taste avoidance and taste aversion: evidence for two different processes. Learn Behav. 2003;31:165–172.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi