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


     


Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 294: R329-R343, 2008. First published November 7, 2007; doi:10.1152/ajpregu.00611.2006
0363-6119/08 $8.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
294/2/R329    most recent
00611.2006v1
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 (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Baird, J.-P.
Right arrow Articles by Mahoney, C. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Baird, J.-P.
Right arrow Articles by Mahoney, C. E.

APPETITE, OBESITY, DIGESTION, AND METABOLISM

Effects of hindbrain melanin-concentrating hormone and neuropeptide Y administration on licking for water, saccharin, and sucrose solutions

John-Paul Baird, Catalina Rios, Jasmine L. Loveland, Janine Beck, Alice Tran, and Carrie E. Mahoney

Department of Psychology and Neuroscience Program, Amherst College, Amherst, Massachusetts

Submitted 27 August 2006 ; accepted in final form 17 October 2007

Melanin-concentrating hormone (MCH) and neuropeptide Y (NPY) are orexigenic peptides found in hypothalamic neurons that project throughout the forebrain and hindbrain. The effects of fourth ventricle (4V) infusions of NPY (5 µg) and MCH (5 µg) on licking for water, 4 mM saccharin, and sucrose (0.1 and 1.0 M) solutions were compared to identify the contributions of each peptide to hindbrain-stimulated feeding. NPY increased mean meal size only for the sucrose solutions, suggesting that caloric feedback or taste quality is pertinent to the orexigenic effect; MCH infusions under identical testing conditions failed to produce increases for any tastant. A second experiment also observed no intake or licking effects after MCH doses up to 15 µg, supporting the conclusion that MCH-induced orexigenic responses require forebrain stimulation. A third experiment compared the 4V NPY results with those obtained after NPY infusions (5 µg) into the third ventricle (3V). In contrast to the effects observed after the 3V NPY injections and previously reported forebrain intracerebroventricular (ICV) NPY infusion studies, 4V NPY failed to increase meal frequency for any taste solution or ingestion rate in the early phases of the sucrose meals. Overall, 4V NPY responses were limited to intrameal behavioral processes, whereas forebrain ICV NPY stimulation elicited both consummatory and appetitive responses. The dissociation between MCH and NPY effects observed for 4V injections is consistent with reports that forebrain ICV injections of MCH and NPY produced nearly dichotomous effects on the pattern of licking microstructure, and, collectively, the results indicate that the two peptides have separate sites of feeding action in the brain.

taste; feeding; microstructure; intake



Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: J.-P. Baird, Dept. Psychology, Amherst College, Amherst, MA 01002 (e-mail: jpbaird{at}amherst.edu)







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