Fructose:Glucose Ratios—A Study of Sugar Self-Administration and Associated Neural and Physiological Responses in the Rat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explored whether different ratios of fructose (F) and glucose (G) in sugar can engender significant differences in self-administration and associated neurobiological and physiological responses in male Sprague-Dawley rats. In Experiment 1, animals self-administered pellets containing 55% F + 45% G or 30% F + 70% G, and Fos immunoreactivity was assessed in hypothalamic regions regulating food intake and reward. In Experiment 2, rats self-administered solutions of 55% F + 42% G (high fructose corn syrup (HFCS)), 50% F + 50% G (sucrose) or saccharin, and mRNA of the dopamine 2 (D2R) and mu-opioid (MOR) receptor genes were assessed in striatal regions involved in addictive behaviors. Finally, in Experiment 3, rats self-administered HFCS and sucrose in their home cages, and hepatic fatty acids were quantified. It was found that higher fructose ratios engendered lower self-administration, lower Fos expression in the lateral hypothalamus/arcuate nucleus, reduced D2R and increased MOR mRNA in the dorsal striatum and nucleus accumbens core, respectively, as well as elevated omega-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids in the liver. These data indicate that a higher ratio of fructose may enhance the reinforcing effects of sugar and possibly lead to neurobiological and physiological alterations associated with addictive and metabolic disorders.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".