4.5 Review

Orexins (hypocretins): The intersection between homeostatic and hedonic feeding

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROCHEMISTRY
卷 157, 期 5, 页码 1473-1494

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jnc.15328

关键词

feeding; food reward; food-seeking; hypocretins; orexins; reward

资金

  1. Indonesian Endowment Fund for Education (LPDP)
  2. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia [CDF ID1108098, CDF 1166123, 1178482]
  3. Australian Research Council [DECRA DE190101244]
  4. Victorian Government's Operational Infrastructure Support Grant

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Orexins play a crucial role in regulating eating behavior beyond homeostatic feeding, including reward and motivation. Studies have shown the involvement of orexins in hedonic and appetitive behavior towards palatable food. There is a bias towards studies involving male subjects in the literature, highlighting the need for future research to include female subjects.
Orexins are hypothalamic neuropeptides originally discovered to play a role in the regulation of feeding behaviour. The broad connections of orexin neurons to mesocorticolimbic circuitry suggest they may play a role in mediating reward-related behaviour beyond homeostatic feeding. Here, we review the role of orexin in a variety of eating-related behaviour, with a focus on reward and motivation, and the neural circuits driving these effects. One emerging finding is the involvement of orexins in hedonic and appetitive behaviour towards palatable food, in addition to their role in homeostatic feeding. This review discusses the brain circuitry and possible mechanisms underlying the role of orexins in these behaviours. Overall, there is a marked bias in the literature towards studies involving male subjects. As such, future work needs to be done to involve female subjects. In summary, orexins play an important role in driving motivation for high salient rewards such as highly palatable food and may serve as the intersection between homeostatic and hedonic feeding.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据