Olfaction contributes to the learned avidity for glucose relative to fructose in mice.

When offered glucose and fructose solutions, rodents consume more glucose solution because it produces stronger postoral reinforcement. Intake of these sugars also conditions a higher avidity for glucose relative to fructose. We asked which chemosensory cue mediates the learned avidity for glucose. We subjected mice to 18 days of sugar training, offering them 0.3, 0.6, and 1 M glucose and fructose solutions. Before and after training, we measured avidity for 0.3 and 0.6 M glucose and fructose in brief-access lick tests. First, we replicated prior work in C57BL/6 mice. Before training, the mice licked at a slightly higher rate for 0.6 M fructose; after training, they licked at a higher rate for 0.6 M glucose. Second, we assessed the necessity of the glucose-specific ATP-sensitive K+ (KATP) taste pathway for the learned avidity for glucose, using mice with a nonfunctional KATP channel [regulatory sulfonylurea receptor (SUR1) knockout (KO) mice]. Before training, SUR1 KO and wild-type mice licked at similar rates for 0.6 M glucose and fructose; after training, both strains licked at a higher rate for 0.6 M glucose, indicating that the KATP pathway is not necessary for the learned discrimination. Third, we investigated the necessity of olfaction by comparing sham-treated and anosmic mice. The mice were made anosmic by olfactory bulbectomy or ZnSO4 treatment. Before training, sham-treated and anosmic mice licked at similar rates for 0.6 M glucose and fructose; after training, sham-treated mice licked at a higher rate for 0.6 M glucose, whereas anosmic mice licked at similar rates for both sugars. This demonstrates that olfaction contributes significantly to the learned avidity for glucose.

Low-calorie sweeteners cause only limited metabolic effects in mice.

There are widespread concerns that low-calorie sweeteners (LCSs) cause metabolic derangement. These concerns stem in part from prior studies linking LCS consumption to impaired glucose tolerance in humans and rodents. Here, we examined this linkage in mice. In experiment 1, we provided mice with chow, water, and an LCS-sweetened solution (saccharin, sucralose, or acesulfame K) for 28 days and measured glucose tolerance and body weight across the exposure period. Exposure to the LCS solutions did not impair glucose tolerance or alter weight gain. In experiment 2, we provided mice with chow, water, and a solution containing saccharin, glucose, or a mixture of both for 28 days, and tested for metabolic changes. Exposure to the saccharin solution increased the insulinemic response of mice to the glucose challenge, and exposure to the saccharin + glucose solution increased the rate of glucose uptake during the glucose challenge. However, neither of these test solutions altered glucose tolerance, insulin sensitivity, plasma triglycerides, or percent body fat. In contrast, exposure to the glucose solution increased glucose tolerance, early insulin response, insulin sensitivity, and percent body fat. We conclude that whereas the LCS-containing solutions induced a few metabolic changes, they were modest compared with those induced by the glucose solution.