Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2002 Dec;74(1):229-40.
doi: 10.1016/s0091-3057(02)00987-5.

Flavor quality and ethanol concentration affect ethanol-conditioned flavor preferences

Affiliations

Flavor quality and ethanol concentration affect ethanol-conditioned flavor preferences

Karen Ackroff et al. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2002 Dec.

Abstract

A previous report showed that outbred rats acquired preferences for a sweetened conditioned stimulus (CS) flavor paired with intragastric ethanol. To evaluate the role of sweet taste in ethanol conditioning, this study compared training with sweetened and unsweetened flavors. In Experiment 1, nondeprived rats were trained to drink one flavored solution (CS+, e.g., grape) paired with intragastric infusion of 5% ethanol and another (CS-, e.g., cherry) paired with intragastric water on alternate days. The volume of ethanol solution infused was matched to the volume of flavored solution the rats consumed. The sweet group's flavors initially contained 0.2% saccharin, reduced to 0.1%, 0.05%, and 0% over days; the plain group's flavors were unsweetened. The sweet group drank more and self-infused more ethanol during training and its preference for the CS+ over the CS- (without saccharin) exceeded that of the plain group (75% versus 62%). Experiment 2 equated total ethanol intake in rats trained with two combinations of flavor quality and ethanol concentration. The Sweet5 group drank flavors with 0.2% saccharin throughout training and tests and received 5% ethanol when they drank CS+, while the Plain10 group drank unsweetened flavors and the CS+ was paired with 10% ethanol. Despite equal daily ethanol doses, the Sweet5 group strongly preferred the CS+ (89%) while the Plain10 group avoided it (31%). The two groups continued to show opposite CS+ preference profiles even when both were tested with sweet CS flavors and 10% ethanol infusions. Thus, sweet taste contributes to the development of ethanol-conditioned flavor preferences, and this effect is not explained by a simple enhancement of ethanol intake.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources