Matthew M. Hurley, Brian Maunze, Megan E. Block, Mogen M. Frenkel, Michael J. Reilly, Eugene Kim, Yao Chen, Yan Li, David A. Baker, Qing-Song Liu, SuJean Choi
Abstract
While pituitary adenylate cyclase activating polypeptide (PACAP) signaling in the hypothalamic ventromedial nuclei (VMN) has been shown to regulate feeding, a challenge in unmasking a role for this peptide in obesity is that excess feeding can involve numerous mechanisms including homeostatic (hunger) and hedonic-related (palatability) drives. In these studies, we first isolated distinct feeding drives by developing a novel model of binge behavior in which homeostatic-driven feeding was temporally separated from feeding driven by food palatability. We found that stimulation of the VMN, achieved by local microinjections of AMPA, decreased standard chow consumption in food-restricted rats (e.g., homeostatic feeding); surprisingly, this manipulation failed to alter palatable food consumption in satiated rats (e.g., hedonic feeding). In contrast, inhibition of the nucleus accumbens (NAc), through local microinjections of GABA receptor agonists baclofen and muscimol, decreased hedonic feeding without altering homeostatic feeding. PACAP microinjections produced the site-specific changes in synaptic transmission needed to decrease feeding via VMN or NAc circuitry. PACAP into the NAc mimicked the actions of GABA agonists by reducing hedonic feeding without altering homeostatic feeding. In contrast, PACAP into the VMN mimicked the actions of AMPA by decreasing homeostatic feeding without affecting hedonic feeding. Slice electrophysiology recordings verified PACAP excitation of VMN neurons and inhibition of NAc neurons. These data suggest that the VMN and NAc regulate distinct circuits giving rise to unique feeding drives, but that both can be regulated by the neuropeptide PACAP to potentially curb excessive eating stemming from either drive.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 September 2016.
All research outputs
#16,721,717
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#7,423
of 11,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#222,530
of 355,242 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#82
of 132 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,538 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 355,242 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 132 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
