Poison-based avoidance learning with flavored or colored water in guinea pigs

Braveman, Norman S.

doi:10.1016/0023-9690(74)90025-3

Cited by 45 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cat Cytotoxic drugs: Cisplatin , Cyclophosphamide (Fetting et al, 1982) Intragastric irritants: Copper sulfate (Kayashima and Hyama, 1976) Motion (Crampton and Daunton, 1983) Apomorphine (Costello and Borison, 1977) Morphine (Villablanca et al, 1984) Radiation (Rabin et al, 1986b) (Rabin et al, 1986b) Nicotine (Beleslin et al, 1981) Hormones and neurotransmitters: Angiotensin II (Rabin et al, 1986a) Other: Amphetamine (Rabin and Hunt, 1992) Dog Cytotoxic drugs: Cisplatin (Gylys et al, 1979), Cyclophosphamide (Amber et al, 1990) Intragastric irritants: Ipecac (Gardner et al, 1996), Copper sulfate (Kayashima and Hayama, 1975) LiCl (Vavilova and Kassil, 1984) Apomorphine (Harrison et al, 1972) Morphine (Lefebvre et al, 1981) Radiation (Cooper and Mattsson, 1979) Nicotine (Vig, 1990) Hormones and neurotransmitters: CCK (Levine et al, 1984), Vasopressin (Wu et al, 1985), Peptide YY (Smith et al, 1989) Ferret Cytotoxic drugs: Cisplatin, cyclophosphamide (Andrews et al, 1990) Intragastric irritants: Copper sulfate, ipecac, NaCl, KCl (Andrews et al, 1990) LiCl (Rabin and Hunt, 1992) Apomorphine (Andrews et al, 1990) Morphine (Barnes et al, 1991) Radiation (Andrews et al, 1990) Guinea pig Intragastric irritants: LiCl (Braveman, 1974) …”

Section: Emesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Signals for nausea and emesis: Implications for models of upper gastrointestinal diseases

Andrews

Horn

2006

Autonomic Neuroscience

218

201

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nausea and vomiting are amongst the most common symptoms encountered in medicine as either symptoms of diseases or side effects of treatments. In a more biological setting they are also important components of an organism's defences against ingested toxins. Identification of treatments for nausea and vomiting and reduction of emetic liability of new therapies has largely relied on the use of animal models, and although such models have proven invaluable in identification of the anti-emetic effects of both 5-hydroxytryptamine3 and neurokinin1 receptor antagonists selection of appropriate models is still a matter of debate. The present paper focuses on a number of controversial issues and gaps in our knowledge in the study of the physiology of nausea and vomiting including: The choice of species for the study of emesis and the underlying behavioural (e.g. neophobia), anatomical (e.g. elongated, narrow abdominal oesophagus with reduced ability to shorten) and physiological (e.g. brainstem circuitry) mechanisms that explain the lack of a vomiting reflex in certain species (e.g. rats); The choice of response to measure (emesis[retching and vomiting], conditioned flavour avoidance or aversion, ingestion of clay [pica], plasma hormone levels[e.g. vasopressin], gastric dysrhythmias) and the relationship of these responses to those observed in humans and especially to the sensation of nausea; The stimulus coding of nausea and emesis by abdominal visceral afferents and especially the vagus-how do the afferents encode information for normal postprandial sensations, nausea and finally vomiting?; Understanding the central processing of signals for nausea and vomiting is particularly problematic in the light of observations that vomiting is more readily amenable to pharmacological treatment than is nausea, despite the assumption that nausea represents "low" intensity activation of pathways that can evoke vomiting when stimulated more intensely.

show abstract

Section: Emesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Signals for nausea and emesis: Implications for models of upper gastrointestinal diseases

Andrews

Horn

2006

Autonomic Neuroscience

218

201

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We are less certain about colour because the reduction in consumption of the coloured water could have been because the vegetable dye had a taste detectable by the Galahs. We do know, however, that guinea pigs, which have a better developed sense of taste, cannot detect red food-colouring at several times the concentration used in this study (Braveman 1974 (100) birds' choice. We rejected this interpretation because consumption of the solution adulterated with LiCl was comparable to the consumption of ordinary tap water.…”

Section: Referencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Avoidance of Toxins by the GalahCacatua Roseicapilla

Jones

Bellingham

Martin

1978

Emu - Austral Ornithology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The relative salience of the components of a given complex may vary from species to species. Taste has been shown to be a more potent stimulus than color for the formation of conditioned aversions by guinea pigs (98,99), but the opposite may be true for birds (100). Salience of stimuli can also vary within one sensory modality.…”

Section: Interaction Of Inherent Preferences and Effects Of Experiencementioning

confidence: 99%

Progress in Animal Flavor Research

Jacobs

Beauchamp

Kare

1978

ACS Symposium Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For a terrestrial animal, flavor may be defined as the composite sensation resulting from placing something in the mouth. Therefore, flavor may include taste, olfactory, vomeronasal, trigeminal and other chemical sense inputs as well as tactile, temperature and proprioceptive cues. Thus, the subjective sensation we call flavor is the result of interactions of a complex of receptors. The bulk of experimental work in this field has focussed upon one class of receptors and associated CNS processes, the taste system. There are powerful arguments that the taste system is a uniquely important component in regulating flavor perception and food intake (e.g., 1,2) , but other sensory components significantly influence flavor perception (e.g., 3, 4).Humans regard flavors as qualities which add to the aesthetics of dining. Applied flavor researchers devote most of their efforts toward making foods and beverages more acceptable to humans or domestic animals. However, flavor sensations are not confined to domestic species' analyses of food substances. Examples of non-food-related flavor perception can be found in the responses of male hamsters to female conspecifics' vaginal secretions and the responses of guinea pigs to conspecific and congeneric urines. These secretions are both sniffed and licked (5, 6), and there is evidence for both olfactory and vomeronasal involvement in the case of the hamster (7). Guinea pig urine appears to include a complex of active substances (8) and codes a great deal of information including species, sex, diet of donor and individual identity (5,9,10). The inputs of several chemical sense systems and hence perception of the flavor of the urine may be required for the processing of all of the information present. As yet, however, there is no experimental evidence that the taste system is crucial in the processing of information contained in mammalian secretions and excretions. Instead, taste is apparently rather specifically concerned with food and liquid intake. Consequently, taste responses are emphasized in this paper in a comparative-evolutionary approach toward flavor and its relation to food selection by wild and domestic species.

show abstract

Poison-based avoidance learning with flavored or colored water in guinea pigs

Cited by 45 publications

References 9 publications

Signals for nausea and emesis: Implications for models of upper gastrointestinal diseases

Signals for nausea and emesis: Implications for models of upper gastrointestinal diseases

Avoidance of Toxins by the GalahCacatua Roseicapilla

Progress in Animal Flavor Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About