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
. 2022 May 1:248:113730.
doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2022.113730. Epub 2022 Feb 8.

The Effects of Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass on Glucose- vs. Fructose-Associated Conditioned Flavor Preference

Affiliations

The Effects of Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass on Glucose- vs. Fructose-Associated Conditioned Flavor Preference

Tadashi Inui et al. Physiol Behav. .

Abstract

In rodents, repeated single-bottle exposures to distinctly flavored isocaloric glucose and fructose solutions, two sugars with different metabolic pathways, eventually lead to a preference for the former. Because Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) surgery decreases preference for and intake of sugar solutions in rats, we tested whether RYGB would curtail the conditioning of a preference for a glucose-paired vs. fructose-paired flavor. RYGB (♂ n=11; ♀ n=10) and sham-operated (SHAM; ♂ n=9; ♀ n=10) rats were trained with a single bottle (30 min/day) containing 8% glucose solution flavored with either 0.05% grape or cherry Kool-Aid (Glu/CSG) or 8% fructose solution with the alternative Kool-Aid flavor (Fru/CSF) in an alternating fashion for 8 days. To determine baseline preferences, a 4-day 30-min two-bottle test was used to assess preference for Glu/CSG vs. Fru/CSF before training. After training, 2-day 30-min two-bottle tests assessed preference for the a) Glu/CSG (CSG-flavored 8% glucose solution) vs Fru/CSF (CSF-flavored 8% fructose solution), b) CSG- vs. CSF-flavored mixture of 4% glucose & 4% fructose (isocaloric), c) CSG- vs. CSF-flavored 0.2% saccharin ("sweet", no calories), and d) CSG- vs. CSF-flavored water. During training, only male SHAM rats demonstrated progressively increased intake of Glu/CSG over Fru/CSF, and female SHAM rats displayed a trend. RYGB eliminated any difference in single-bottle intake of these solutions during training, regardless of sex. Like their male and female SHAM counterparts, male RYGB rats displayed a conditioned preference for the CSG-associated stimulus in Tests 1-3. Although female RYGB rats displayed acquisition of the conditioned flavor preference in Test 1, unlike the other groups, when the differential sugar cue between the two solutions was removed in Tests 2 and 3, female rats did not display a CSG preference. When the sugar and sweetener cues were both removed on Test 4, all groups displayed some generalization decrement. Thus, RYGB does not compromise the ability of rats to learn and express a glucose- vs. fructose-associated conditioned flavor preference when the exact CS used in training is presented in testing. The mechanistic basis for the sex difference in the effect of RYGB on the generalization decrement observed in this type of flavor preference learning warrants further study.

Keywords: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass; conditioned flavor preference; fructose; generalization decrement; glucose; sex difference.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Schedule of experiments. A) Flow of experiment. B) Procedures of Pre-Test, Training, and Test. The solution(s) were presented for 30 min in a day. Food and water were removed from the home cage during the presentation and for the following 1 hour. Animals were assigned to be exposed to either of glucose-grape and fructose-cherry or glucose-cherry and fructose-grape in a balanced fashion. In both cases, the glucose and fructose solutions were defined as Glu/CSG and Fru/CSF respectively. Each stimulus was presented every other day on training. The stimulus order was counterbalanced in each group (RYGB and SHAM).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Mean ± SE body weight changes after RYGB or sham operation for males and females. The weight on each day was presented as percentage of that on a day before surgery (baseline). The mean initial starting weight ± se on the baseline was 291.8 ± 5.53 g in Female-RYGB (n = 10), 296.3 ± 8.03 g in Female-SHAM (n = 10), 527.64 ± 7.17 g in Male-RYGB (n = 11), and 517.56 ± 14.66 g in Male-SHAM (n = 9).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Mean (bars) and individual (symbols) CSG-flavored solution preference scores on the last two days of the two-bottle Pre-Test (A) and the various two-bottle tests after training (C), and intake volume during single bottle Training (B); * in panels A and C represents significant (p ≤ 0.05) increases from 50%; ‡ in panel C represents significant (p ≤ 0.05) difference from Glu/CSG preference during Pre-Test. # represents significant (p ≤ 0.05) difference between Glu/CSG and Fru/CSF intake on a given test trial in the series in panel B.

Similar articles

References

    1. Mingrone G, Panunzi S, De Gaetano A, Guidone C, Iaconelli A, Leccesi L, et al. Bariatric surgery versus conventional medical therapy for type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. (2012),366:1577–85.10.1056/NEJMoa1200111 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Schauer PR, Bhatt DL, Kirwan JP, Wolski K, Brethauer SA, Navaneethan SD, et al. Bariatric surgery versus intensive medical therapy for diabetes--3-year outcomes. N Engl J Med. (2014),370:2002–13.10.1056/NEJMoa1401329 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Tadross JA, le Roux CW The mechanisms of weight loss after bariatric surgery. Int J Obes (Lond). (2009),33 Suppl 1:S28–32.10.1038/ijo.2009.14 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sjostrom L Bariatric surgery and reduction in morbidity and mortality: experiences from the SOS study. Int J Obes (Lond). (2008),32 Suppl 7:S93–7.10.1038/ijo.2008.244 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Miras AD, le Roux CW Mechanisms underlying weight loss after bariatric surgery. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. (2013), 10:575–84.10.1038/nrgastro.2013.119 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types