4.6 Article

Statistical modeling implicates neuroanatomical circuit mediating stress relief by 'comfort' food

期刊

BRAIN STRUCTURE & FUNCTION
卷 221, 期 6, 页码 3141-3156

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00429-015-1092-x

关键词

Stress; Comfort food; Sucrose; Synaptic plasticity; Bayesian modeling; Reward

资金

  1. NIDDK NIH HHS [K01 DK078906, R03 DK089018, R01 DK091425] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIMH NIH HHS [R01 MH049698] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A history of eating highly palatable foods reduces physiological and emotional responses to stress. For instance, we have previously shown that limited sucrose intake (4 ml of 30 % sucrose twice daily for 14 days) reduces hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenocortical (HPA) axis responses to stress. However, the neural mechanisms underlying stress relief by such 'comfort' foods are unclear, and could reveal an endogenous brain pathway for stress mitigation. As such, the present work assessed the expression of several proteins related to neuronal activation and/or plasticity in multiple stress-and reward-regulatory brain regions of rats after limited sucrose (vs. water control) intake. These data were then subjected to a series of statistical analyses, including Bayesian modeling, to identify the most likely neurocircuit mediating stress relief by sucrose. The analyses suggest that sucrose reduces HPA activation by dampening an excitatory basolateral amygdala-medial amygdala circuit, while also potentiating an inhibitory bed nucleus of the stria terminalis principle subdivision-mediated circuit, resulting in reduced HPA activation after stress. Collectively, the results support the hypothesis that sucrose limits stress responses via plastic changes to the structure and function of stress-regulatory neural circuits. The work also illustrates that advanced statistical methods are useful approaches to identify potentially novel and important underlying relationships in biological datasets.

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

4.6
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