Food reinforcement, the dopamine D-2 receptor genotype, and energy intake in obese and nonobese humans

Department of Pediatrics, University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY 14214-3000, USA.
Behavioral Neuroscience (Impact Factor: 3.25). 11/2007; 121(5):877-86. DOI: 10.1037/0735-7044.121.5.877
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The authors measured food reinforcement, polymorphisms of the dopamine D2 receptor (DRD2) and dopamine transporter (DAT1) genes, and laboratory energy intake in 29 obese and 45 nonobese humans 18-40 years old. Food reinforcement was greater in obese than in nonobese individuals, especially in obese individuals with the TaqI A1 allele. Energy intake was greater for individuals high in food reinforcement and greatest in those high in food reinforcement with the TaqI A1 allele. No effect of the DAT1 genotype was observed. These data show that individual differences in food reinforcement may be important for obesity and that the DRD2 genotype may interact with food reinforcement to influence energy intake.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The interaction of food reinforcement and the inability to delay gratification are related to adult energy intake and obesity. This study was designed to test the association of sibling pair differences in relative reinforcing efficacy of food and delay discounting on sibling pair differences in zBMI scores of same-gender zBMI-discordant siblings. We tested main and interactive relationships between delay discounting and relative reinforcing efficacy of food on zBMI discordance in 14 zBMI-discordant biological sibling pairs (6 female pairs) using a discordant sibling study design. Sibling pair differences in relative reinforcing efficacy of food were associated with sibling pair differences in zBMI (p = 0.046); this effect was moderated by delay discounting (p < 0.002). Sibling pairs with greater differences in relative reinforcing efficacy and delay discounting had greater differences in zBMI. The combination of greater sibling pair differences in delay discounting and relative reinforcing efficacy is associated with greater discordance in zBMI in adolescent sibling pairs. Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
    Appetite 11/2014; 85. DOI:10.1016/j.appet.2014.11.023 · 2.52 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Prior work using animal models to study the effects of obesogenic diets on food motivation have generated inconsistent results, with some reporting increases and others reporting decreases in responding on food-reinforced tasks. Here, we identified two specific variables that may account for these discrepant outcomes - the length of time on the obesigenic diet and the familiarity of the food reinforcer - and examined the independent roles of these factors. Time on diet was found to be inversely related to food motivation, as rats consuming a 40% high-fat diet (HFD) for only 3weeks did not differ from chow-fed rats when responding for a sucrose reinforcer on a progressive ratio (PR) schedule, but responding was suppressed after 6weeks of ad lib HFD consumption. Explicitly manipulating experience with the sucrose reinforcer by pre-exposing half the rats prior to 10weeks of HFD consumption attenuated the motivational deficit seen in the absence of this familiarity, resulting in obese rats performing at the same level as lean rats. Finally, after 8weeks on a HFD, rats did not express a conditioned place preference for sucrose, indicating a decrement in reward value independent of motivation. These findings are consistent with prior literature showing an increase in food motivation for rats with a shorter time consuming the obesigenic diet, and for those with more prior experience with the reinforcer. This account also helps reconcile these findings with increased food motivation in obese humans due to extensive experience with palatable food and suggests that researchers engaging in non-human animal studies of obesity would better model the conditions under which human obesity develops by using a varied, cafeteria-style diet to increase the breadth of food experiences. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    Physiology & Behavior 01/2015; 141C:69-77. DOI:10.1016/j.physbeh.2015.01.008 · 3.03 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The primary defining characteristic of a diagnosis of an eating disorder (ED) is the "disturbance of eating or eating-related behavior that results in the altered consumption or absorption of food" (DSM V; American Psychiatric Association, 2013). There is a spectrum, ranging from those who severely restrict eating and become emaciated on one end to those who binge and overconsume, usually accompanied by some form of compensatory behaviors, on the other. How can we understand reasons for such extremes of food consummatory behaviors? Recent work on obesity and substance use disorders has identified behaviors and neural pathways that play a powerful role in human consummatory behaviors. That is, corticostriatal limbic and dorsal cognitive neural circuitry can make drugs and food rewarding, but also engage self-control mechanisms that may inhibit their use. Importantly, there is considerable evidence that alterations of these systems also occur in ED. This paper explores the hypothesis that an altered balance of reward and inhibition contributes to altered extremes of response to salient stimuli, such as food. We will review recent studies that show altered sensitivity to reward and punishment in ED, with evidence of altered activity in corticostriatal and insula processes with respect to monetary gains or losses, and tastes of palatable foods. We will also discuss evidence for a spectrum of extremes of inhibition and dysregulation behaviors in ED supported by studies suggesting that this is related to top-down self-control mechanisms. The lack of a mechanistic understanding of ED has thwarted efforts for evidence-based approaches to develop interventions. Understanding how ED behavior is encoded in neural circuits would provide a foundation for developing more specific and effective treatment approaches.
    Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience 12/2014; 8:410. DOI:10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00410 · 4.16 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 20, 2014