ライフサイエンスコーパス: tastant

1 sumption of eating/drinking the once-avoided tastant.

2 r saccharin in an operant task to obtain the tastant.

3 ction of the reward value of a sweet and fat tastant.

4 movement to obtain an appetitive or aversive tastant.

5 bstrate for how odorants gain the quality of tastants.

6 own synthetic and naturally occurring bitter tastants.

7 e exhibit enhanced taste preference to sweet tastants.

8 show a greatly enhanced preference for umami tastants.

9 s via membrane receptors that bind the umami tastants.

10 ells function in the responses to attractive tastants.

11 neurotransmitters, chemokines, odorants, or tastants.

12 having receptors for bitter, sweet, or umami tastants.

13 d responses to intraoral odorants but not to tastants.

14 s of neurons with different sensitivities to tastants.

15 terologous cells but not by other classes of tastants.

16 nvironment, including odors, pheromones, and tastants.

17 ontributing to rats' ability to discriminate tastants.

18 that controls the detection of certain sweet tastants.

19 ptor cells respond selectively or broadly to tastants.

20 cell may be capable of recognizing multiple tastants.

21 data discerning their behavioral response to tastants.

22 e examined the neuronal response to selected tastants.

23 late the threshold of response to appetitive tastants.

24 and single neuron ability to encode multiple tastants.

25 n the VPMpc of alert rats receiving multiple tastants.

26 pecificity when tested with a broad panel of tastants.

27 Up to 69% of neurons respond to multiple tastants.

28 e conducted to identify the key non-volatile tastants.

29 fructose along with a number of other sweet tastants.

30 among the many thousands of available bitter tastants.

31 dly required for responding to other noxious tastants.

32 ice fail to release ATP when stimulated with tastants.

33 pulses; 1 Hz) were tested with each of four tastants (0.1 M NaCl, 0.01 M HCl, 0.01 M quinine and 0.5

34 Tastants (0.1 m NaCl, 0.1 m sucrose, 0.01 m citric acid,

35 response of MOF-76 and the concentration of tastant, (3) the strength of taste is quantified by the

36 c-Fos expression upon presentation of a sour tastant (30 mM citric acid).

37 ty maps generated by stimulation with a sour tastant, 30 mM citric acid.

38 cant cross-correlations (CCs) to a subset of tastants across a hundreds of milliseconds timescale.

39 ied Ussing chamber, which allowed us to flow tastants across the apical membrane while monitoring the

40 We find that acid tastants act by the activation of a subset of bitter neu

41 es of small ensembles of cortical neurons to tastants administered to awake rats.

42 An analysis of the response to eight tastants also revealed an association between dendritic

43 receptor activation of transducin by bitter tastants: AMP and chemically related compounds inhibited

44 ividual forms an association between a novel tastant and toxin-induced gastrointestinal malaise.

45 gulation of GAS and (ii) suggest that bitter tastants and bitter-masking compounds could be potential

46 ive taste stimuli and consumed the palatable tastants and dissolved odorants.

47 Flies sense tastants and nonvolatile pheromones through gustatory br

48 ons exhibited similar responses to palatable tastants and odorants dissolved in water.

49 ve roles that extend beyond the detection of tastants and pheromones.

50 l nonvolatile repulsive chemicals, including tastants and pheromones.

51 GC neurons respond to intraorally delivered tastants and tasteless odorants dissolved in water and w

52 in response to the presence of sour (acidic) tastants and this released 5-HT activates 5-HT3 receptor

53 The gustatory system detects tastants and transmits signals to the brain regarding in

54 bo, P < 0.05), whereas both a combination of tastants and umami decreased hunger scores compared with

55 gustatory cortex of awake rats subjected to tastants and water delivery on the tongue.

56 diates GC responses to uncued tastants, cued tastants, and anticipatory cues.

57 inates attractive and repulsive odorants and tastants, and makes behavioral decisions accordingly, ar

58 Bitter, sweet, and umami tastants are detected by G-protein-coupled receptors tha

59 ndamental principles that underlie how sweet tastants are detected by these receptors.

60 otential toxins, but what happens when these tastants are mixed?

61 tonium benzoate, despite the fact that these tastants are thought to stimulate different taste recept

62 ltiple pathways are available for individual tastants as well.

63 ized specific sweet/bitter receptors and the tastant-associated G protein alpha-gustducin.

64 approximately 150 ms, to distinguish between tastants at different concentrations.

65 The strong interaction of odorants and tastants at the NTS underscores its role as the initial

66 ge decrease in [Ca(2+)]i caused by effective tastant bronchodilators provides an efficient cell-based

67 ehaviorally to structurally diverse "bitter" tastants but cannot discriminate among them.

68 expressing cells respond normally to bitter tastants but do not taste sweet or amino acid stimuli.

69 is important for perceiving the intensity of tastants but it remains unclear as to how single neurons

70 ropriately to increasing concentrations of a tastant, but not for the chemical identification necessa

71 trophysiological responses of mice to bitter tastants, but not to NaCl, HCl, or sucrose.

72 se oxidation controls intake levels of sweet tastants by modulating extracellular dopamine levels in

73 ested that the detection of bitter and sweet tastants by taste receptor cells in the mouth is likely

74 Bitter tastants can completely relax myometrium precontracted b

75 Paradoxically, bitter tastants caused relaxation of isolated ASM and dilation

76 However, using new methods for delivering tastant chemicals and making electrophysiological record

77 Rather, individual tastant chemicals are represented as patterns of spiking

78 unique neural representations of individual tastant chemicals.

79 ouse myometrial cells, a phenotypical bitter tastant (chloroquine, ChQ) reverses the rise in intracel

80 F-76, which are dependent on the logarithmic tastant concentration, (4) the tastant is identified by

81 GC can be correlated or anticorrelated with tastant concentration, yet whether one or both neural re

82 re broadly tuned and responded to increasing tastant concentrations by either increasing or decreasin

83 e responses were only evoked at intermediate tastant concentrations.

84 ity depends on the balance of sugar and acid tastant concentrations.

85 cations on whether cues predicting different tastants could be encoded selectively by GC neurons.

86 ore animals commenced a response guided by a tastant cue, GC ensembles contained more information tha

87 ow the VPMpc mediates GC responses to uncued tastants, cued tastants, and anticipatory cues.

88 A mouse T2R (mT2R-5) responds to the bitter tastant cycloheximide, and a human and a mouse receptor

89 Inhaled bitter tastants decreased airway obstruction in a mouse model o

90 R-5 in insect cells and demonstrate specific tastant-dependent activation of gustducin, a G protein i

91 We measured tastant-dependent secretion of glucagon-like peptide-1 (

92 Our results provide a molecular basis for tastant detection by the entire repertoire of sweet tast

93 the electrophysiological correlates for fast tastant detection have not been identified.

94 Rapid tastant detection is necessary to prevent the ingestion

95 Intraduodenal infusions of the tastants did not result in gastrointestinal symptoms.

96 astants, their functional responses to umami tastants do not fully resemble the responses of a single

97 is by which animals may discriminate between tastants during a single lick cycle.

98 criminate between spiking rates to different tastants during the first second of stimulus processing.

99 Comparing responses to tastants either passively delivered, or self-administere

100 In addition, rewarding and aversive tastants evoked inverse patterns of norepinephrine and d

101 Here we examine gustatory physiology, tastant-evoked appetitive behavior, and food ingestion t

102 icited an equivalent reduction (to 64.5%) in tastant-evoked responses of nine additional NTS units re

103 pses with gustatory fibres and may integrate tastant-evoked signals.

104 NTS tastant-evoked unit responses were unaffected by lingual

105 ory cortex can respond either exclusively to tastants, exclusively to odorants, or to both (bimodal).

106 Specifically, cells responding to tastants expressed PLCbeta2, whereas cells responding to

107 generalized to sucrose but not to the other tastants; extinction of the aversion to electrical stimu

108 ing in alert rats trained to self-administer tastants following a go signal revealed that neurons in

109 ard, and then, on the fifth lick, received a tastant (FR5 schedule).

110 An influential hypothesis argues that bitter tastants generate localized Ca(2+) signals, as revealed

111 f cells that respond directly to sour (acid) tastants has only been inferred from recordings in situ,

112 on those neurons that responded to only one tastant, however, a number of potentially important rela

113 y cortex (GC), a cortical area necessary for tastant identification and discrimination, contain suffi

114 le neuron might respond most strongly to one tastant in the first 500 msec of a response and then res

115 to gustducin in vitro, and respond to bitter tastants in a functional expression assay.

116 al studies have shown that rats can identify tastants in approximately 200 ms, although the electroph

117 e or quinine, consistent with roles for both tastants in higher-order and reflexive function.

118 cells in response to topically administered tastants in live mice.

119 bution of transduction mechanisms for bitter tastants in rat taste receptor cells (TRCs) could be inf

120 ivity of taste cells elicited by small-sized tastants in the blood circulation.

121 lter the responses to subsequently presented tastants in the nucleus of the solitary tract (NTS) of u

122 in a position to contribute to chemotaxis to tastants in this organism.

123 lies to humans, discriminate a wide range of tastants, including sugars, bitter compounds, NaCl, and

124 ever, long-term exposure to some unpalatable tastants increases acceptance of these foods.

125 oup confers sensitivity to one or more sweet tastants, indicating direct roles in ligand recognition

126 The Gr66a mutant exhibited normal tastant-induced action potentials upon presentation of t

127 ing of the [Ca(2+)]i is necessary for bitter tastant-induced ASM cell relaxation.

128 Tastant information in LFPs was also independent and had

129 ical stimulation of the rostral shell during tastant infusion prevented the emergence of negative aff

130 udy investigated the effect of intraduodenal tastant infusions (bitter, sweet, and umami) on food int

131 We further show that bitter tastants inhibit L-type voltage-dependent Ca(2+) channel

132 denal infusion of umami and a combination of tastants inhibits feelings of hunger, but only the latte

133 ask, suggesting a lesser role for signalling tastant intensity.

134 For [In(OH)(bdc)]n, the tastant interacts stereochemically with poly(acrylic aci

135 For MOF-76, the tastant interacts with incorporated water in MOF-76 thro

136 e logarithmic tastant concentration, (4) the tastant is identified by the shape of the 3D principal c

137 In Drosophila, detection of tastants is thought to be mediated by members of a famil

138 se and then respond most strongly to another tastant later in the response.

139 A receptor-to-neuron-to-tastant map is constructed.

140 e responsive to a range of stimuli including tastants, mechanic force and short chain fatty acids.

141 te perception begins with the recognition of tastant molecules by unknown membrane receptors localize

142 eport that in mouse primary ASM cells bitter tastants neither evoke localized Ca(2+) events nor alter

143 ubset of TRCs leads to the discrimination of tastants of different qualities and intensities is incom

144 ttributed to the optimal stimulus or another tastant on the basis of spike count.

145 , cue-and-taste) and those that responded to tastants only (i.e., taste-only).

146 ient elevation of cytoplasmic Ca2+ to either tastants or depolarization with KCl, but never both.

147 um glutamate (umami), a combination of the 3 tastants, or placebo (tap water) over a period of 60 min

148 Furthermore, the responses to umami tastants persist in the taste cells of T1R3-knockout mic

149 amilies of chemoreceptors that detect odors, tastants, pheromones, and noxious stimuli, including rec

150 t discriminating taste + odor stimuli versus tastants presented alone for all taste qualities using b

151 esidual behavioral responses to concentrated tastants, presumably via postingestive detection.

152 tween gustatory cortical (GC) neurons during tastant processing.

153 There is now persuasive evidence that tastant quality is mediated by labeled lines, whereby di

154 fically generalized the aversion to 2 bitter tastants: quinine and urea.

155 Although tastant receptors and taste signaling pathways have been

156 e 16HBE was found to express transcripts for tastant receptors, RGS21, and downstream taste signaling

157 To examine the basis of sweet tastant recognition and coding, we engineered animals ex

158 Notably, responses to all other tastants remained unaffected, proving that the segregati

159 When integrated tastant responses (firing rates averaged across 2.5 sec)

160 Tastant-responsive neurons were broadly tuned and respon

161 we sought to determine the role of RGS21 in tastant responsiveness.

162 restore grk-2 behavioral avoidance of bitter tastants, revealing modality-specific mechanisms for TRP

163 As rats reached 90% reacceptance of a tastant (saccharin: SAC) that had previously been associ

164 gger dedicated behavioral outputs, but their tastant selectivity is determined by the nature of the r

165 timulated with bitter, sweet, or sour (acid) tastants, serotonin was released.

166 or neurons (GRNs) to attractive and aversive tastants show diurnal and circadian rhythms in spike amp

167 subunits and those thought to be involved in tastant signal transduction.

168 s confirmed that RGS21 acts to oppose bitter tastant signaling to cAMP and calcium second messenger c

169 ed second-order neurons; and (3) observed in tastant-specific behavior.

170 formation content of these neurons can drive tastant-specific behavior.

171 upling significantly increased the amount of tastant-specific information contained in ensembles.

172 here we show the opposite--namely, that the tastant-specific temporal aspects (firing rate envelope

173 ste receptor cells (TRCs) are activated upon tastant stimulation and transmit taste signals to affere

174 s in the nucleus tractus solitarius (NTS) to tastant stimuli were recorded before and after lingual a

175 Infusion of the combination of tastants substantially decreased food intake (422 +/- 97

176 elanogaster, it is unclear whether different tastants, such as bitter compounds, are sensed in gustat

177 The tastants sucralose, glucose, caffeine, denatonium, and t

178 re proven on aqueous solutions of five basic tastants: sucrose (sweet), caffeine (bitter), citric aci

179 h bitter neurons that now responded to sweet tastants, sweet neurons that responded to bitter or swee

180 ited a greater ability to discriminate among tastants than nonsynchronized neurons.

181 t of GRs underlying the detection of a toxic tastant that drives avoidance behaviour in an insect.

182 tor confers sensitivity to selected aversive tastants that match the responses of the neuron that the

183 aste buds are apically stimulated with umami tastants, their functional responses to umami tastants d

184 Poorly absorbed sweet tastants (TIM), which probably expose a greater length o

185 ent for the reinforcing properties of bitter tastant to the MBs.

186 , taste signaling is initiated by binding of tastants to G-protein-coupled receptors in specialized e

187 ses were confirmed by delivery of four basic tastants to the anterior tongue.

188 produce sucrose-like responses even when the tastant was omitted.

189 e neuronal response to the four "prototypic" tastants, we were able to demonstrate a positive correla

190 Multiple trials of each tastant were delivered during recordings made in oral so

191 mediately after capsaicin, responses to each tastant were in nearly all cases depressed (mean, 61.5%

192 We found that expected tastants were coded more rapidly than unexpected stimuli

193 Spiking responses to intraorally delivered tastants were recorded from rats implanted with bundles

194 a qualitative model for the coding of bitter tastants where the variety of transduction mechanisms fo

195 ome strongly attracted to its cognate bitter tastants, whereas expression of the same receptor (or ev

196 Many receptors detect general odorants or tastants, whereas some detect pheromones.

197 Unlike most tastants, which are detected through cell-surface G prot