Objectives:The mechanisms for how saturated fat and sugar-based beverages contribute to human obesity are poorly understood. This paper describes a series of experiments developed to examine the response of hypothalamic neuropeptides to diets rich in sugar and fat, using three different diets: a high-fat high-sugar (HFHS) choice diet with access to chow, saturated fat and a 30% sugar solution; a high-fat (HF) choice diet with access to chow and saturated fat; or to a high-sugar (HS) choice diet with access to chow and a sugar solution. Method: We first studied caloric intake, body weight gain, hormonal alterations and hypothalamic neuropeptide expression when male Wistar rats were subjected to an HFHS choice, an HF choice or an HS choice diet for 1 week. Next, we studied caloric intake and body weight gain when rats were subjected to the choice diets for 5 weeks. Finally, we measured neuropeptide expression in hepatic vagotomized rats subjected to an HFHS choice, an HF choice or an HS choice diet for 1 week. Results: In rats on an HF choice diet, plasma leptin concentrations and proopiomelanocortin (POMC) mRNA increased and neuropeptide Y (NPY) mRNA decreased. Rats on an HFHS choice diet showed identical plasma leptin concentrations as rats on an HF choice diet. However, NPY mRNA increased and POMC mRNA decreased. An HS choice diet for 1 week did not alter hypothalamic neuropeptide expression or plasma leptin concentrations. As hormonal changes did not explain the differences in hypothalamic neuropeptide expression between rats on the choice diets, we addressed whether neuronal feedback signals mediated the hypothalamic neuropeptide response. The POMC mRNA response to different diets depended on an intact innervation of liver and upper intestinal tract. Conclusion: Our data suggest that the specific combination of saturated fat and a 30% sugar solution results in hyperphagiainduced obesity and alters hypothalamic neuropeptide expression, and that the response of the melanocortin system is mediated by the hepatic vagus.

Objectives: In diet-induced obesity, it is not clear whether impaired glucose metabolism is caused directly by the diet, or indirectly via obesity. This study examined the effects of different free-choice, high-caloric, obesity-inducing diets on glucose metabolism. In these free-choice diets, saturated fat and/or a 30% sugar solution are provided in an addition to normal chow pellets. Method: In the first experiment, male rats received a free-choice high-fat high-sugar (HFHS), free-choice high-fat (HF) or a chow diet. In a second experiment, male rats received a free-choice high-sugar (HS) diet or chow diet. For both experiments, after weeks 1 and 4, an intravenous glucose tolerance test was performed. Results: Both the HFHS and HF diets resulted in obesity with comparable plasma concentrations of free fatty acids. Interestingly, the HF diet did not affect glucose metabolism, whereas the HFHS diet resulted in hyperglycemia, hyperinsulinemia and in glucose intolerance because of a diminished insulin response. Moreover, adiposity in rats on the HF diet correlated positively with the insulin response to the glucose load, whereas adiposity in rats on the HFHS diet showed a negative correlation. In addition, total caloric intake did not explain differences in glucose tolerance. To test whether sugar itself was crucial, we next performed a similar experiment in rats on the HS diet. Rats consumed three times as much sugar when compared with rats on the HFHS diet, which resulted in obesity with basal hyperinsulinemia. Glucose tolerance, however, was not affected. Conclusion: Together, these results suggest that not only obesity or total caloric intake, but the diet content also is crucial for the glucose intolerance that we observed in rats on the HFHS diet.

Obesity is a risk factor for type II diabetes, atherosclerosis, and some forms of cancer. Variation in common measures of obesity (e.g., BMI, waist/hip ratio) is largely explained by heritability. The advent of genome‐wide association studies (GWAS) has made it possible to identify several genetic variants that associate with measures of obesity, but how exactly these genetic variants contribute to overweight has remained largely unresolved. One first hint is given by the fact that many of the associated variants reside in or near genes that act in the central nervous system, which implicates neuronal signaling in the etiology of obesity. Although the brain controls both energy intake and expenditure, it has more capacity to regulate energy intake rather than energy expenditure. In environments where food is abundant, this renders the body prone to weight increases. To gain more insight into the neurobiological mechanisms involved, we set out to investigate the effect of dietary exposure on the expression levels of obesity‐associated genes in the ventro‐medial hypothalamus (VMH)/arcuate nucleus (ARC) and the substantia nigra (SN)/ventral tegmental area (VTA), two brain regions that are implicated in feeding behavior. We show that the expression of Etv5, Faim2, Fto, Negr1 but not Sh2b1 is affected by nutritional state in these two areas, thereby providing insight into the relationship between nutritional state and expression levels of obesity‐associated genes in two brain areas relevant to feeding.

The central melanocortin (MC) system mediates its effects on food intake via MC3 (MC3R) and MC4 receptors (MC4R). Although the role of MC4R in meal size determination, satiation, food preference, and motivation is well established, the involvement of MC3R in the modulation of food intake has been less explored. Here, we investigated the role of MC3R on the incentive motivation for food, which is a crucial component of feeding behavior. Dopaminergic neurons within the ventral tegmental area (VTA) have a crucial role in the motivation for food. We here report that MC3Rs are expressed on VTA dopaminergic neurons and that pro-opiomelanocortinergic (POMC) neurons in the arcuate nucleus of the hypothalamus (Arc) innervate these VTA dopaminergic neurons. Our findings show that intracerebroventricular or intra-VTA infusion of the selective MC3R agonist γMSH increases responding for sucrose under a progressive ratio schedule of reinforcement, but not free sucrose consumption in rats. Furthermore, ex vivo electrophysiological recordings show increased VTA dopaminergic neuronal activity upon γMSH application. Consistent with a dopamine-mediated effect of γMSH, the increased motivation for sucrose after intra-VTA infusion of γMSH was blocked by pretreatment with the dopamine receptor antagonist α-flupenthixol. Taken together, we demonstrate an Arc POMC projection onto VTA dopaminergic neurons that modulates motivation for palatable food via activation of MC3R signaling.

The striatum harbors two neuronal populations that enable action selection. One population represents the striatonigral pathway, expresses the dopamine receptor D1 (DRD1) and promotes the execution of motor programs, while the other population represents the striatopallidal pathway, expresses the dopamine receptor D2 (DRD2) and suppresses voluntary activity. The two populations integrate distinct sensorimotor, cognitive, and emotional information streams and their combined activity enables the selection of adaptive behaviors. Characterization of these populations is critical to the understanding of their role in action selection, because it aids the identification of the molecular mechanisms that separate them. To that end, we used fluorescent in situ hybridization to quantify the percentage of striatal cells that (co)express dopaminergic receptors and receptors of the cannabinoid, melanocortin or opioid neurotransmitters systems. Our main findings are that the cannabinoid 1 receptor is equally expressed on both populations with a gradient from dorsal to ventral striatum, that the opioid receptors have a preference for expression with either the DRD1 or DRD2 and that the melanocortin 4 receptor (MC4R) is predominantly expressed in ventral parts of the striatum. In addition, we find that the level of MC4R expression determines its localization to either the DRD1 or the DRD2 population. Thereby, we provide insight into the sensitivity of the two dopaminoceptive populations to these neurotransmitters and progress the understanding of the mechanisms that enable action selection.