4.5 Article

Rats habituated to chronic feeding restriction show a smaller increase in olfactory bulb reactivity compared to newly fasted rats

Journal

CHEMICAL SENSES
Volume 28, Issue 5, Pages 389-395

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/chemse/28.5.389

Keywords

electrophysiological recordings; fasting; food regimen; mitral cell; odor; plasticity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

During the 1970s, the multiunit reactivity of the olfactory bulb to food odor was extensively shown to increase before their usual meal in rats habituated to having a single 2 h daily meal compared to the same rats recorded after their usual meal. More recently, we reported dramatic modifications of mitral cell single-unit reactivity in adult rats following a simple a manipulation of the olfactory environment - exposure to an odor. The present study aimed at testing the hypothesis that a simple behavioral change such as habituation to chronic food restriction may induce profound changes in olfactory bulb responsiveness compared to occasional fasting. We compared mitral cell reactivity in non-fasted rats, in rats fasted during 22 h for the very first time, and in rats habituated during 15 days to a chronic 22 h food restriction. Mitral cell single-unit reactivity was found to increase less in rats habituated to fasting than in newly fasted rats. Indeed, the proportion of mitral cell responses to food and non-food odors was significantly higher in rats habituated to fasting than in non-fasted rats, but lower than in newly fasted rats. The proportion of simple unsynchronized and synchronized responses of 1b and 2b types was also lower in habituated rats whereas the proportion of complex synchronized responses of 4b type increased. This decreased responsiveness in habituated rats, similar to that observed in rats repeatedly exposed for 20 min per day to an odor during six consecutive days in our previous studies, is discussed with respect to olfactory bulb plasticity.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available