Attenuated feeding responses to circadian and palatability cues in mice lacking neuropeptide Y

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Dana K. Sindelar ; Richard D. Palmiter ; Stephen C. Woods and Michael W. Schwartz
• 刊名：Peptides
• 出版年：2005
• 出版时间：December 2005
• 年：2005
• 卷：26
• 期：12
• 页码：2597-2602
• 全文大小：204 K

文摘

Neuropeptide Y (NPY) is a potent orexigenic peptide that is implicated in the feeding response to a variety of stimuli. The current studies employed mice lacking NPY (Npy−/−) and their wild-type (Npy+/+) littermates to investigate the role of this peptide in the feeding response to circadian and palatability cues. To investigate the response to a circadian stimulus, we assessed food intake during the 4-h period following dark onset, a time of day characterized by maximal rates of food consumption. Compared to Npy+/+ controls, intake of Npy−/− mice was reduced by 33 % during this period (0.6 ± 0.1 g versus 0.9 ± 0.1 g; p ≤ 0.05). In contrast, intake did not differ between genotypes when measured over a 24-h period (3.7 ± 0.2 g versus 3.5 ± 0.3 g; p = ns). Furthermore, reduced dark cycle 4 h food intake in Npy−/− mice was not evident after a 24-h fast (1.4 ± 0.1 g for both genotypes; p = ns), despite a pronounced delay in the initiation of feeding (636 ± 133 s versus 162 ± 29 s; p ≤ 0.05). To investigate the role of NPY in the feeding response to palatability cues, mice were presented with a highly palatable diet (HP) for 1 h each day (in addition to having ad libitum access to chow) for 18 days. Npy+/+ mice rapidly increased daily HP intake such that by the end of the first week, they derived a substantial fraction of daily energy from this source (41 ± 3 % ). By comparison, HP intake was markedly reduced in Npy−/− mice during the first week (24 ± 7 % of daily energy intake, p ≤ 0.05 versus Npy+/+), although it eventually increased (by Day 9) to values comparable to those of Npy+/+ controls. These experiments suggest that NPY contributes to the mechanism whereby food intake increases in response to circadian and palatability cues and that mechanisms driving food intake in response to these stimuli differ from those activated by energy restriction.