Curt Richter and the female rat

Acute d-fenfluramine, but not fluoxetine decreases sweet intake in BALB/c, C57BL/6 and SWR inbred mouse strains

Dopamine, opioid and muscarinic receptor antagonists differentially reduce sucrose and saccharin intakes across inbred mouse strains. Whereas these systems stimulate sweet intake, serotonin signaling inhibits food intake. The present study examined whether fluoxetine (0.1-10 mg/kg) or d-fenfluramine (0.1-6 mg/kg) differentially inhibited sucrose or saccharin intake in BALB/c, C57BL/6 and SWR mice. Fluoxetine marginally altered sucrose intake in all strains. d-fenfluramine significantly, but quite similarly reduced (ID₄₀) sucrose and saccharin intake in BALB/c (5.7 vs. 5.8 mg/kg), C57BL/6 (4.4 vs. 4.3 mg/kg) and SWR (4.6 vs. 5.6 mg/kg) mice, suggesting serotonin-induced inhibition of orosensory mechanisms in all three inbred mouse strains.

A physiological perspective on the neuroscience of eating

I present the thesis that 'being physiological,' i.e., analyzing eating under conditions that do not perturb, or minimally perturb, the organism's endogenous processes, should be a central goal of the neuroscience of eating. I describe my understanding of 'being physiological' based on [i] the central neural-network heuristic of CNS function that traces back to Cajal and Sherrington, [ii] research on one of the simpler problems in the neuroscience of eating, identification of endocrine signals that control eating. In this context I consider natural meals, physiological doses and ranges, and antagonist studies. Several examples involve CCK. Next I describe my view of the cutting edge in the molecular neuroscience of eating as it has evolved from the discovery of leptin signaling through the application of optogenetic and pharmacogenetic methods. Finally I describe some novel approaches that may advance the neuroscience of eating in the foreseeable future. I conclude that [i] the neuroscience of eating may soon be able to discern 'physiological' function in the operation of CNS networks mediating eating, [ii] the neuroscience of eating should capitalize on methods developed in other areas of neuroscience, e.g., improved methods to record and manipulate CNS function in behaving animals, identification of canonical regional circuits, use of population electrophysiology, etc., and [iii] subjective aspects of eating are crucial aspects of eating science, but remain beyond mechanistic understanding.

Sex differences in the physiology of eating

Hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal (HPG) axis function fundamentally affects the physiology of eating. We review sex differences in the physiological and pathophysiological controls of amounts eaten in rats, mice, monkeys, and humans. These controls result from interactions among genetic effects, organizational effects of reproductive hormones (i.e., permanent early developmental effects), and activational effects of these hormones (i.e., effects dependent on hormone levels). Male-female sex differences in the physiology of eating involve both organizational and activational effects of androgens and estrogens. An activational effect of estrogens decreases eating 1) during the periovulatory period of the ovarian cycle in rats, mice, monkeys, and women and 2) tonically between puberty and reproductive senescence or ovariectomy in rats and monkeys, sometimes in mice, and possibly in women. Estrogens acting on estrogen receptor-α (ERα) in the caudal medial nucleus of the solitary tract appear to mediate these effects in rats. Androgens, prolactin, and other reproductive hormones also affect eating in rats. Sex differences in eating are mediated by alterations in orosensory capacity and hedonics, gastric mechanoreception, ghrelin, CCK, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), glucagon, insulin, amylin, apolipoprotein A-IV, fatty-acid oxidation, and leptin. The control of eating by central neurochemical signaling via serotonin, MSH, neuropeptide Y, Agouti-related peptide (AgRP), melanin-concentrating hormone, and dopamine is modulated by HPG function. Finally, sex differences in the physiology of eating may contribute to human obesity, anorexia nervosa, and binge eating. The variety and physiological importance of what has been learned so far warrant intensifying basic, translational, and clinical research on sex differences in eating.