AJP - Regu AJP: Cell Physiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 294: R52-R57, 2008. First published November 7, 2007; doi:10.1152/ajpregu.00635.2007
0363-6119/08 $8.00
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
294/1/R52    most recent
00635.2007v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (3)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Saggu, S.
Right arrow Articles by Lundy, R. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Saggu, S.
Right arrow Articles by Lundy, R. F.

APPETITE, OBESITY, DIGESTION, AND METABOLISM

Forebrain neurons that project to the gustatory parabrachial nucleus in rat lack glutamic acid decarboxylase

Shalini Saggu and Robert F. Lundy

Department of Anatomical Sciences and Neurobiology, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, Kentucky

Submitted 4 September 2007 ; accepted in final form 1 November 2007


   ABSTRACT
TOP
 ABSTRACT
MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 GRANTS
 REFERENCES
 
Evidence suggests that GABA might mediate the inhibitory influence of centrifugal inputs on taste-evoked responses in the parabrachial nucleus (PBN). Previous studies show that activation of the gustatory cortex (GC), bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BNST), central nucleus of the amygdala (CeA), and lateral hypothalamus (LH) inhibits PBN taste responses, GABAergic neurons are present in these forebrain regions, and GABA reduces the input resistance of PBN neurons. The present study investigated the expression of glutamic acid decarboxylase immunoreactivity (GAD_67 ir) in GC, BNST, CeA, and LH neurons that project to the PBN in rats. After anesthesia (50 mg/kg ip Nembutal), injections of the retrograde tracer Fluorogold (FG) were made in the physiologically defined gustatory PBN. Brain tissue containing the above forebrain structures was processed and examined for FG and GAD_67 ir. Similar to previous studies, each forebrain site contained retrogradely labeled neurons. Our results suggest further that the major source of input to the PBN taste region is the CeA (608 total cells) followed by GC (257 cells), LH (106 cells), and BNST (92 cells). This suggests a differential contribution to centrifugal control of PBN taste processing. We further show that despite the presence of GAD_67 neurons in each forebrain area, colocalization was extremely rare, occurring only in 3 out of 1,063 FG-labeled cells. If we assume that the influence of centrifugal input is mediated by direct projections to the gustatory region of the PBN, then GABAergic forebrain neurons apparently are not part of this descending pathway.

amygdala; bed nucleus; hypothalamus; cortex; taste; GAD

THE MAJOR BIOLOGIC FUNCTION of the taste system is to determine whether the contents of the oral cavity are ingested or rejected. This gustatory behavioral response, however, is modifiable by learning and immediate physiological state (5, 7). The underlying mechanism appears to involve a change in gustatory hedonic value, i.e., palatability, rather than taste quality. Although palatability is unquestionably a key factor in guiding food intake, little is known about its neural basis. Communication between the forebrain and brain stem, however, is critical because the isolated brain stem is not sufficient to support learned (e.g., conditioned taste aversion) and some forms of unlearned control (e.g., sodium appetite) of taste-guided behavior (12–14).

Recent evidence suggests that the axons necessary for assigning hedonic value to taste stimuli originate in the pontine parabrachial nucleus (PBN), the second central synapse for ascending gustatory information but do not relay through thalamocortical projections (31). In addition to the thalamocortical pathway, PBN efferents target several ventral forebrain areas directly including the lateral hypothalamus (LH), central nucleus of the amygdala (CeA), and bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BNST). These same forebrain areas, including gustatory insular cortex (GC) also send projections back to the PBN (2, 16, 17, 27, 29, 30, 33, 43).

In normal animals, the induction of behaviors like conditioned taste aversion (CTA) and sodium appetite, which alter gustatory hedonic value, coincide with changes in taste-evoked responses in the PBN (34, 35). Whether this reflects a causal relationship is unsettled, although communication with forebrain regions is critical because altered taste responses induced by CTA acquisition are abolished following decerebration (42). Furthermore, electrical stimulation of the GC, BNST, CeA, and LH modulates taste-evoked responses in the PBN (20, 22–24, 42). Both excitatory and inhibitory effects were observed; however, inhibition of taste responses predominated, suggesting a role for the inhibitory neurotransmitter GABA. GABAergic neurons are present in each of these forebrain regions (1, 3, 9–11, 39), and GABA produces a concentration-dependent reduction in input resistance of neurons in the caudomedial gustatory zone of the PBN (19). However, one study has shown that CeA neurons retrogradely labeled following stereotaxic guidance of WGA-HRP injections into the PBN do not contain GABA (39).

Because the PBN consists of different regions processing gustatory, visceral, and somatosensory signals, the present study tested the hypothesis that LH, CeA, BNST, and GC neurons projecting to the gustatory PBN synthesize GABA. We electrophysiologically isolated the gustatory PBN and iontophoretically injected the retrograde tracer Fluorogold (FG). Brain tissue containing the above forebrain structures was subsequently examined for neurons that contain FG and glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD). Immunohistochemical localization of GAD has been used extensively as a marker for GABAergic neurons (6, 10, 25, 41).


   MATERIALS AND METHODS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 GRANTS
 REFERENCES
 
Subjects. Five male Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats weighing 350–450 g [CrL:CD (SD) BR; Charles River Breeding Laboratories] were used in this study. The animals were maintained in a temperature-controlled colony room on a 12:12-h light-dark cycle and allowed free access to normal rat chow (Teklad 8604) and distilled water. All procedures conformed to National Institutes of Health guidelines and were approved by the University of Louisville Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee.

Surgery. The rats were anesthetized with a 50 mg/kg ip injection of pentobarbital sodium (Nembutal). Atropine was administered to reduce bronchial secretions. Additional doses of Nembutal (0.1 ml) were administered as necessary to continue a deep level of anesthesia. The animals were placed on a feedback-controlled heating pad, and rectal temperature was monitored to maintain body temperature at 37 ± 0.5°C. Animals were secured in a stereotaxic instrument, and the skull was exposed with a midline incision then leveled with reference to β and {lambda}. A small hole was drilled through the bone overlying the cerebellum to allow access to the PBN.

Electrophysiological recording. A 0.1 M NaCl solution was applied to the anterior two-thirds of the tongue for 10 s using a wash bottle, and extracellular neural responses were recorded using a glass-insulated tungsten microelectrode oriented 20° off vertical with the tip pointing rostral (1–3 M{Omega}). Only the anterior two-thirds of the tongue was stimulated because numerous prior studies have demonstrated that forebrain activation has a profound influence on brain stem taste cells that receive input via the chorda tympani nerve (8, 21–24, 37, 38). Further, the concentration of NaCl used in the present study has been shown to produce a significant neural response in each "best-stimulus" class of PBN neurons (23, 24). Once the gustatory PBN was located, the tungsten electrode was replaced by a micropipette (ID 10–20 µm) filled with 4% Fluorogold (FG; Biotium) dissolved in saline. The taste-responsive area was electrophysiologically relocated, and FG was iontophoretically injected (+2 µA for 20 min; 2 min on and 1 min off). Cambridge Electronic Design's Spike2 hardware and software were used to record NaCl-evoked neural responses (23). No attempt was made to isolate single neurons for analysis of response rate; rather, we isolated regions in which a response to NaCl applied to the tongue was visually above the baseline discharge (Fig. 1A).


Figure 1
View larger version (51K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 1. A: electrophysiological response to tongue application of 0.1 M NaCl recorded through the Fluorogold (FG)-filled injection pipette. Bottom: raw neural response; top: the peristimulus histogram. B: fluorescent image of the resultant FG injection (x5 magnification). C: brightfield image of the same section showing the approximate area of the injection relative to PBN subdivisions (white oval). The PBN section corresponds approximately to Fig. 59 (9.8 mm posterior to bregma) in the rat stereotaxic atlas of Paxinos and Watson (32). cm, central medial; dm, dorsal medial; vm, ventral medial; vl, ventral lateral.

 
Colchicine treatment. Five days after surgery, the animals were reanesthetized and 3 µl of colchicine (20 µg/µl dissolved in 0.1 M NaCl, Tokyo Kasei) was infused into the lateral ventricle ipsilateral to the FG injection site [Coordinates: 0.85 mm anterior to bregma, 1.5 mm lateral to midline and 4.0 mm ventral to dura according to Paxinos and Watson (32)] using a 25-µl Hamilton syringe with a 28-gauge needle mounted in a stereotaxic microinjection unit (Kopf; model no. 5000). The animals were perfused 48 h after colchicine administration.

Perfusion and histology. The animals were administered a lethal dose of Nembutal (100 mg/kg ip) and perfused through the ascending aorta, initially with 250 ml of 0.9% saline containing 5 ml of 100 units/ml heparin followed by 500 ml of 4% paraformaldehyde in 0.1 M phosphate buffer (pH 7.4). The brains were removed, blocked just rostral to the PBN, and postfixed overnight at 4°C in the same fixative. Coronal (50 µm) sections were cut using a vibrating microtome (Leica VT 1000S), and every other section was collected for subsequent immunohistochemistry.

Immunohistochemistry. First, brain sections were incubated in 5% normal goat serum (NGS; Jackson Laboratories) and 1% BSA (Jackson Laboratories) mixed in 0.3% triton-X phosphate-buffered saline (TPBS) for 1 h. Sections were then incubated overnight (4°C) in rabbit FG antibody (Chemicon; AB153) diluted 1:2,500 in TPBS. Sections were rinsed several times in PBS followed by 2-h incubation in FITC goat anti-rabbit diluted 1:100 in PBS with 5% NGS. Following several more rinses, sections were incubated in PBS containing 5% normal mouse serum (NMS; Jackson Labs) and 1% BSA for 1 h, then for 48 h at 4°C in mouse monoclonal glutamic acid decarboxylase antibody (Chemicon, catalog no. MAB5406) diluted 1:2,000 in PBS (36, 40). The immunogen for this antibody was a recombinant fusion protein containing the unique N terminal regions of GAD67 not shared by GAD65 protein. On day 4, sections were washed several times and incubated for 2 h in Cy-3 goat anti-mouse (Jackson Laboratories) diluted 1:200 in PBS containing 5% NMS. Following several rinses, the tissue sections were mounted on gelatin-coated slides and cover slipped. For one series of tissue sections, the GAD_67 antibody was omitted and, consequently, Cy-3 immunofluorescence.

Data analysis. Cell bodies positive for FG (FITC; excitation filter: 490 nm; barrier filter: 550 nm) and GAD_67 (Cy-3; excitation filter: 520–554 nm; barrier filter: 580 nm) immunoreactivity in the GC, CeA, BNST, and LH were identified using sequential scanning with an Olympus confocal microscope. All forebrain areas were identified based on the Paxinos and Watson rat brain atlas (32). The GC and LH are the least defined areas, and a brief description of the location of retrogradely labeled cells follows. GC was identified as the area approximately between the level at which the anterior commissure crosses midline and the disappearance of the genu of the corpus callosum rostrally. The LH was identified as an area bounded laterally by the optic tract, dorsally by the internal capsule, medially by the fornix, and ventrally by the surface of the brain. The number of immunoreactive cells per section (sum of cells divided by the number of sections) was calculated and used for statistical analyses. Only tissue sections that contained retrogradely labeled neurons were analyzed. Comparisons between forebrain sites were performed using one-way ANOVA and paired-sample t-tests (SPSS 12.0). In some instances, post hoc analyses (Bonferroni) were used to determine the source of statistically significant differences. The results are presented as means ± SE. A value of P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.


   RESULTS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 GRANTS
 REFERENCES
 
Injection sites. In each animal, the taste-responsive region of the PBN was relocated with the FG-filled injection pipette. An example of the response to 0.1 M NaCl applied to the anterior tongue is shown in Fig. 1A. The fluorescent photomicrograph in Fig. 1B shows the resulting FG injection site in the PBN. A brightfield image of the same section is shown in Fig. 1C. Microscopic examination of each injection site revealed that predominantly the central medial, ventral medial, and ventral lateral portions of the caudal PBN were targeted with minimal spread into rostrolateral regions. Figure 2 shows a summary of the five FG injections into the gustatory responsive PBN.


Figure 2
View larger version (36K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 2. Schematic representation of FG injections in the central medial (cm), dorsal medial (dm), ventral medial (vm), and ventral lateral (vl) subdivisions of the PBN. Top to bottom: rostral to caudal. The approximate levels relative to bregma are indicated below each figure (32). Me5, mesencephalic trigeminal nucleus; LPBN, caudal portion of the lateral visceral sensitive PBN; bc, brachium conjunctivum.

 
Retrograde labeling. The number of FG-labeled neuronal cell bodies differed between forebrain sites (F3,163 = 11.8, P < 0.01). The CeA contained significantly more retrogradely labeled cells compared with the LH, BNST, and GC (P < 0.01). The LH, BNST, and GC contained a similar number of FG-labeled cells per section (Fig. 3A; P = 1.0). Nevertheless, the number of GC sections (n = 56) with retrogradely filled neuronal cells was far greater compared with the LH (n = 26) and BNST (n = 19) but not the CeA (n = 59). Further analyses using paired-sample t-tests revealed a significantly greater total number of FG-labeled neurons in GC (n = 257) compared with the LH (n = 106; T4 = 4.8, P < 0.01) and BNST (n = 92; T4 = 2.5, P = 0.03). The total number of retrogradely labeled cells in the CeA (n = 608) was significantly greater than each of the other forebrain areas (P ≤ 0.05).


Figure 3
View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 3. The mean number of cells immunoreactive for FG (A) and GAD_67 (B) in the gustatory cortex (GC), central nucleus of the amygdala (CeA), bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BNST), and lateral hypothalamus (LH). A: FG label. *Significantly different from GC, BNST, and LH. B: GAD_67 label. *Significantly different from LH; **Significantly different from CeA and LH.

 
GAD_67 immunoreactivity. In each forebrain site, immunohistochemical processing for GAD_67 resulted in robust labeling of cells with distinguishable nuclei and short processes (Fig. 4). Quantification of neuronal cells immunoreactive for GAD_67 (GAD_67 ir) in those sections containing FG retrogradely labeled cells is shown in Fig. 3B. Similar to retrogradely labeled cells, the mean number of GAD_67 ir neurons per section differed between the GC, CeA, BNST, and LH (F3,163 = 32.8, P < 0.01). GC and BNST contained significantly more GAD_67-positive neurons compared with the CeA (P ≤ 0.01) and LH (P < 0.01) but were similar to one another (P = 0.14). Further analyses of total number of GAD ir neurons was not performed, because only GAD-positive cells in those sections containing FG-labeled neurons were counted. Shown in the photomicrographs of Fig. 4, are examples of FG-labeled projection neurons and GAD_67 ir neurons in the GC (top left), BNST (top right), CeA (bottom left), and LH (bottom right). Despite the presence of GAD-positive neurons in each forebrain area, colocalization with FG retrogradely labeled cells was extremely rare. Overall, only three neuronal cell bodies were double labeled, one cell each in the GC, BNST, and CeA.


Figure 4
View larger version (78K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 4. Photomicrographs of FG-labeled projection neurons and GAD-positive neurons in the GC, CeA, BNST, and LH. Arrow in GC indicates a group of FG-labeled cells (green in each panel). Double arrows indicate GAD_67 ir cells (red in each panel). A scale bar is shown in lower right corner of GC (white, 50 µm).

 

   DISCUSSION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
GRANTS
 REFERENCES
 
This study demonstrated that forebrain neurons projecting to taste-responsive sites within the caudal PBN do not contain glutamic acid decarboxylase, the enzyme responsible for the conversion of glutamic acid to GABA. Out of 1,063 retrogradely filled forebrain neurons, only three exhibited GAD_67 immunoreactivity. Prior studies show that activation of GC, BNST, CeA, and LH inhibits PBN neural activity, suggesting a role for the inhibitory neurotransmitter GABA. The present data do not exclude a role for GABA in mediating descending inhibitory control of taste processing but do suggest that it is not due to direct input from GABAergic forebrain neurons. The present results also demonstrate that taste-responsive sites within the caudal PBN were targeted to a varying degree by different forebrain areas. The largest source of descending input originated in the CeA followed by GC. The same PBN injections resulted in a considerably smaller number of retrogradely labeled neurons in the BNST and LH.

Contribution of forebrain areas to descending input to the PBN. Although each of the forebrain areas examined has been shown to inhibit taste-responsive PBN neurons, the magnitude of inhibition and percentage of neurons under inhibitory control appear to vary with forebrain stimulation site. For instance, Lundy and Norgren (24) showed that more PBN taste neurons were suppressed by activity in the CeA (41/48) and GC (32/45) than by the LH (14/32) in rats. Although the influence of BNST stimulation on PBN taste neurons has not been tested in rats, a recent study in hamsters showed that 98% of PBN taste cells was inhibited by BNST activation (20). These data suggest that the BNST, CeA, and GC are the major sources of neurons with axons projecting to the PBN. This is consistent with the present results showing that the CeA and GC contribute significantly more neurons to descending forebrain-gustatory PBN pathways compared with the LH. In the case of the BNST, however, our results from small physiologically defined injections suggest that the BNST contributes fewer neurons with projections back to the PBN compared with the CeA and GC. It might be that the number of BNST neurons projecting to the PBN differs between hamster and rat or the influence of BNST activation on PBN taste cells is, in part, indirect (e.g., a BNST-CeA-PBN pathway).

Modulation of PBN gustatory processing. The predominant inhibition of PBN taste processing by forebrain stimulation suggests a role for the major CNS inhibitory transmitter GABA. Indeed, Kobashi and Bradley (19) have shown that GABA produces a concentration-dependent reduction in input resistance of neurons in the caudomedial gustatory zone of the PBN. Findings from the present double-label experiments, however, demonstrate that forebrain neurons projecting to central medial, ventral medial, and ventral lateral portions of the caudal gustatory PBN do not express GAD_67. This is consistent with a recent electronmicroscopy study investigating the chemical nature of CeA projections to the PBN (18). Although GABA-positive CeA terminals were found to innervate the lateral visceral portion of the PBN, no such terminals were found in the medial gustatory region of the PBN. Together, these data indicate that forebrain-induced inhibition of PBN taste processing is not mediated by direct projections from GABAergic forebrain neurons. One hypothesis is that the visceral-sensitive lateral PBN is a necessary way station for the centrifugal projections that modulate taste processing in the medial PBN.

Another hypothesis is that some other neurochemical(s) expressed by neurons in the GC, BNST, CeA, and LH mediate descending control of taste processing. For instance, Moga et al. (27) provided evidence for at least five distinct neuropeptide-immunoreactive cell populations in the hypothalamus that project to the PBN. PBN-projecting neurons originating in the CeA (26) and BNST (28) also are immunoreactive for many of these same neurochemicals, including somatostatin (SS), neurotensin (NT), corticotrophin-releasing factor (CRF), enkephalin, substance P, and galanin. Following injections of retrograde tracer centered in the ventrolateral PBN, cells labeled both for the tracer and NT, SS, or CRF were concentrated in the lateral CeA (26). These investigators mentioned in passing that injections centered within the medial or dorsomedial PBN resulted in labeling confined mainly to the medial CeA but did not present or discuss their neurochemical content. Similarly, for the LH, retrograde tracer injections were aimed at the medial and lateral PBN, but the neurochemical content of LH inputs were not presented or discussed in this context (27). Thus, the relationship between descending forebrain neurochemical pathways and the various sensory inputs processed within the PBN remains to be established. That is, all of these studies used stereotaxic coordinates to place tracer injections, which provided valuable information but did not discern between gustatory, visceral, and somatosensory regions of the PBN.

Perspectives and Significance In the present experiments, we confirmed and extended prior data that examined the neurochemical content of forebrain neurons projecting to the gustatory PBN. Considerable evidence suggests that the reciprocal connections between the PBN and ventral forebrain are critical for elaborating and probably for altering the hedonic value of a taste. If we assume that the influence of centrifugal input is mediated by direct projections to the gustatory region of the PBN, then GABAergic forebrain neurons apparently are not part of this descending pathway. In terms of taste response inhibition, one alternative is that intrinsic GABAergic neurons interface between descending axon terminals and PBN gustatory neurons. This synaptic arrangement has been hypothesized to mediate the inhibitory influence of GC on second-order taste neurons in the nucleus of the solitary tract (37). These cells are maintained under tonic GABAergic inhibition, and GC-induced inhibition is blocked by local application of the GABAA receptor antagonist bicuculline. Alternatively, centrifugal influences might be mediated by an indirect pathway to PBN taste cells that first synapses in the lateral visceral sensitive region of the PBN. The PBN is a critical substrate for the integration of gustatory and more rostrolaterally processed visceral information, and physiological factors associated with ingestion modulate PBN taste responses (4, 15). GABA-positive CeA terminals innervating the lateral PBN have been reported (18). Future studies using electrophysiological, anatomical, and lesion-behavioral techniques will continue our efforts to determine the neurochemicals and neural circuit(s) that mediate centrifugal control of taste processing in the brain stem.


   GRANTS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 GRANTS
REFERENCES
 
This research was supported by National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders Grant DC-006698.


   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
The authors thank Nick Miersma for technical support.


   FOOTNOTES
 

Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: R. Lundy, Dept. of Anatomical Sciences and Neurobiology, Univ. of Louisville School of Medicine, 500 South Preston St., Louisville, KY 40202 (e-mail: robert.lundy{at}louisville.edu)

The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.


   REFERENCES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 GRANTS
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Abrahamson EE, Moore RY. The posterior hypothalamic area: chemoarchitecture and afferent connections. Brain Res 889: 1–22, 2001.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  2. Alden M, Besson JM, Bernard JF. Organization of the efferent projections from the pontine parabrachial area to the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis and neighboring regions: a PHA-L study in the rat. J Comp Neurol 341: 289–314, 1994.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  3. Araki M, McGeer PL, McGeer EG. Retrograde HRP tracing combined with a pharmacohistochemical method for GABA transaminase for the identification of presumptive GABAergic projections to the habenula. Brain Res 304: 271–277, 1984.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  4. Baird JP, Travers SP, Travers JB. Integration of gastric distension and gustatory responses in the parabrachial nucleus. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 281: R1581–R1593, 2001.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Berridge KC, Flynn FW, Schulkin J, Grill HJ. Sodium depletion enhances salt palatability in rats. Behav Neurosci 98: 652–660, 1984.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  6. Blessing WW, Oertel WH, Willoughby JO. Glutamic acid decarboxylase immunoreactivity is present in perikarya of neurons in nucleus tractus solitarius of rat. Brain Res 322: 346–350, 1984.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  7. Breslin PA, Spector AC, Grill HJ. A quantitative comparison of taste reactivity behaviors to sucrose before and after lithium chloride pairings: a unidimensional account of palatability. Behav Neurosci 106: 820–836, 1992.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  8. Cho YK, Li CS, Smith DV. Descending influences from the lateral hypothalamus and amygdala converge onto medullary taste neurons. Chem Senses 28: 155–171, 2003.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Day HE, Curran EJ, Watson SJ Jr, Akil H. Distinct neurochemical populations in the rat central nucleus of the amygdala and bed nucleus of the stria terminalis: evidence for their selective activation by interleukin-1β. J Comp Neurol 413: 113–128, 1999.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  10. Esclapez M, Tillakaratne NJ, Kaufman DL, Tobin AJ, Houser CR. Comparative localization of two forms of glutamic acid decarboxylase and their mRNAs in rat brain supports the concept of functional differences between the forms. J Neurosci 14: 1834–1855, 1994.[Abstract]
  11. Fabri M, Manzoni T. Glutamic acid decarboxylase immunoreactivity in callosal projecting neurons of cat and rat somatic sensory areas. Neuroscience 123: 557–566, 2004.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  12. Grill HJ, Norgren R. The taste reactivity test. I. Mimetic responses to gustatory stimuli in neurologically normal rats. Brain Res 143: 263–279, 1978.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  13. Grill HJ, Norgren R. The taste reactivity test. II. Mimetic responses to gustatory stimuli in chronic thalamic and chronic decerebrate rats. Brain Res 143: 281–297, 1978.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  14. Grill HJ, Schulkin J, Flynn FW. Sodium homeostasis in chronic decerebrate rats. Behav Neurosci 100: 536–543, 1986.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  15. Hajnal A, Takenouchi K, Norgren R. Effect of intraduodenal lipid on parabrachial gustatory coding in awake rats. J Neurosci 19: 7182–7190, 1999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Holstege G, Meiners L, Tan K. Projections of the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis to the mesencephalon, pons, and medulla oblongata in the cat. Exp Brain Res 58: 379–391, 1985.[Web of Science][Medline]
  17. Hopkins DA, Holstege G. Amygdaloid projections to the mesencephalon, pons and medulla oblongata in the cat. Exp Brain Res 32: 529–547, 1978.[Web of Science][Medline]
  18. Jia HG, Zhang GY, Wan Q. A GABAergic projection from the central nucleus of the amygdala to the parabrachial nucleus: an ultrastructural study of anterograde tracing in combination with post-embedding immunocytochemistry in the rat. Neurosci Lett 382: 153–157, 2005.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  19. Kobashi M, Bradley RM. Effects of GABA on neurons of the gustatory and visceral zones of the parabrachial nucleus in rats. Brain Res 799: 323–328, 1998.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  20. Li CS, Cho YK. Efferent projection from the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis suppresses activity of taste-responsive neurons in the hamster parabrachial nuclei. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 291: R914–R926, 2006.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Li CS, Cho YK, Smith DV. Taste responses of neurons in the hamster solitary nucleus are modulated by the central nucleus of the amygdala. J Neurophysiol 88: 2979–2992, 2002.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Li CS, Cho YK, Smith DV. Modulation of parabrachial taste neurons by electrical and chemical stimulation of the lateral hypothalamus and amygdala. J Neurophysiol 93: 1183–1196, 2005.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Lundy RF Jr, Norgren R. Pontine gustatory activity is altered by electrical stimulation in the central nucleus of the amygdala. J Neurophysiol 85: 770–783, 2001.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Lundy RF Jr, Norgren R. Activity in the hypothalamus, amygdala, and cortex generates bilateral and convergent modulation of pontine gustatory neurons. J Neurophysiol 91: 1143–1157, 2004.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  25. Mason GF, Martin DL, Martin SB, Manor D, Sibson NR, Patel A, Rothman DL, Behar KL. Decrease in GABA synthesis rate in rat cortex following GABA-transaminase inhibition correlates with the decrease in GAD(67) protein. Brain Res 914: 81–91, 2001.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  26. Moga MM, Gray TS. Evidence for corticotropin-releasing factor, neurotensin, and somatostatin in the neural pathway from the central nucleus of the amygdala to the parabrachial nucleus. J Comp Neurol 241: 275–284, 1985.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  27. Moga MM, Herbert H, Hurley KM, Yasui Y, Gray TS, Saper CB. Organization of cortical, basal forebrain, and hypothalamic afferents to the parabrachial nucleus in the rat. J Comp Neurol 295: 624–661, 1990.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  28. Moga MM, Saper CB, Gray TS. Bed nucleus of the stria terminalis: cytoarchitecture, immunohistochemistry, and projection to the parabrachial nucleus in the rat. J Comp Neurol 283: 315–332, 1989.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  29. Nishijo H, Uwano T, Tamura R, Ono T. Gustatory and multimodal neuronal responses in the amygdala during licking and discrimination of sensory stimuli in awake rats. J Neurophysiol 79: 21–36, 1998.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  30. Norgren R. Taste pathways to hypothalamus and amygdala. J Comp Neurol 166: 17–30, 1976.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  31. Norgren R, Hajnal A, Mungarndee SS. Gustatory reward and the nucleus accumbens. Physiol Behav 89: 531–535, 2006.[CrossRef][Medline]
  32. Paxinos G, Watson C. The Rat Brain in Stereotaxic Coordinates. Sydney, Australia: Academic, 1998.
  33. Saper CB. Reciprocal parabrachial-cortical connections in the rat. Brain Res 242: 33–40, 1982.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  34. Shimura T, Komori M, Yamamoto T. Acute sodium deficiency reduces gustatory responsiveness to NaCl in the parabrachial nucleus of rats. Neurosci Lett 236: 33–36, 1997.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  35. Shimura T, Tanaka H, Yamamoto T. Salient responsiveness of parabrachial neurons to the conditioned stimulus after the acquisition of taste aversion learning in rats. Neuroscience 81: 239–247, 1997.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  36. Singec I, Knoth R, Ditter M, Volk B, Frotscher M. Neurogranin is expressed by principal cells but not interneurons in the rodent and monkey neocortex and hippocampus. J Comp Neurol 479: 30–42, 2004.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  37. Smith DV, Li CS. GABA-mediated corticofugal inhibition of taste-responsive neurons in the nucleus of the solitary tract. Brain Res 858: 408–415, 2000.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  38. Smith DV, Ye MK, Li CS. Medullary taste responses are modulated by the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis. Chem Senses 30: 421–434, 2005.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  39. Sun N, Yi H, Cassell MD. Evidence for a GABAergic interface between cortical afferents and brainstem projection neurons in the rat central extended amygdala. J Comp Neurol 340: 43–64, 1994.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  40. Sweatt AJ, Garcia-Espinosa MA, Wallin R, Hutson SM. Branched-chain amino acids and neurotransmitter metabolism: expression of cytosolic branched-chain aminotransferase (BCATc) in the cerebellum and hippocampus. J Comp Neurol 477: 360–370, 2004.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  41. Tanaka I, Ezure K, Kondo M. Distribution of glycine transporter 2 mRNA-containing neurons in relation to glutamic acid decarboxylase mRNA-containing neurons in rat medulla. Neurosci Res 47: 139–151, 2003.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  42. Tokita K, Karadi Z, Shimura T, Yamamoto T. Centrifugal inputs modulate taste aversion learning associated parabrachial neuronal activities. J Neurophysiol 92: 265–279, 2004.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  43. Veening JG, Swanson LW, Sawchenko PE. The organization of projections from the central nucleus of the amygdala to brainstem sites involved in central autonomic regulation: a combined retrograde transport-immunohistochemical study. Brain Res 303: 337–357, 1984.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]




This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
294/1/R52    most recent
00635.2007v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (3)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Saggu, S.
Right arrow Articles by Lundy, R. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Saggu, S.
Right arrow Articles by Lundy, R. F.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2008 by the American Physiological Society.