Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 14, 2026

New Methods to Study Gustatory Coding
Published on: June 29, 2017
Behavioral and neural responses to gustatory stimuli delivered non-contingently through intra-oral cannulas
Ernesto S Soares1, Jennifer R Stapleton, Abel Rodriguez
1Department of Neurobiology, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Abstract:
The act of eating requires a decision by an animal to place food in its mouth. The reasons to eat are varied and include hunger as well as the food's expected reward value. Previous studies of tastant processing in the rat primary gustatory cortex (GC) have used either anesthetized or awake behaving preparations that yield somewhat different results. Here we have developed a new preparation in which we explore the influences of intra-oral and non-contingent tastant delivery on rats' behavior and on their GC neural responses. We recorded single-unit activity in the rat GC during two sequences of tastant deliveries, PRE and POST, which were separated by a waiting period. Six tastants ranging in hedonic value from sucrose to quinine were delivered in the first two protocols called 4TW and L-S. In the third one, the App L-S protocol, only hedonically positive tastants were used. In the 4TW protocol, tastants were delivered in blocks whereas in the two L-S protocols tastants were randomly interleaved. In the 4TW and L-S protocols the probability of ingesting tastants in the PRE sequence decreased exponentially with the trial number. Moreover, in both protocols this decrease was greater in the POST than in the PRE sequence likely because the subjects learned that unpleasant tastants were to be delivered. In the App L-S protocol the decrease in ingestion was markedly slower than in the other protocols, thus supporting the hypothesis that the decrease in appetitive behavior arises from the non-contingent intra-oral delivery of hedonically negative tastants like quinine. Although neuronal responses in the three protocols displayed similar variability levels, significant differences existed between the protocols in the way the variability was partitioned between chemosensory and non-chemosensory neurons. While in the 4TW and L-S protocols the former population displayed more changes than the latter, in the App L-S protocol variability was homogeneously distributed between the two populations. We posit that these tuning changes arise, at least in part, from compounds released upon ingestion, and also from differences in areas of the oral cavity that are bathed as the animals ingest or reject the tastants.
More Related Videos
11:16A Novel Procedure for Evaluating the Reinforcing Properties of Tastants in Laboratory Rats: Operant Intraoral Self-administration
Published on: February 6, 2014
10:44Examination of Rapid Dopamine Dynamics with Fast Scan Cyclic Voltammetry During Intra-oral Tastant Administration in Awake Rats
Published on: August 12, 2015
Related Concept Videos
The Physiology of Taste
Gustation
Taste Buds and Receptors
Neural Regulation
Conditioned Taste Aversion
A notable characteristic of conditioned taste aversion is that it often requires only a single exposure...
Salivary Glands and Saliva