Separate Populations of Receptor Cells and Presynaptic Cells in Mouse Taste Buds

DeFazio, R. Anthony; Dvoryanchikov, Gennady; Maruyama, Yutaka; Kim, Joung W.; Pereira, Elizabeth; Roper, Stephen D.; Chaudhari, Nirupa

doi:10.1523/jneurosci.0515-06.2006

Cited by 253 publications

(358 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

324

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the peripheral taste organ, CB 1 immnoreactivity was observed in fewer than 12% of GAD67-expressing TCs, which in mice are thought to be presynaptic cells (28) (Fig. 4B and Table S1).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Endocannabinoids selectively enhance sweet taste

Yoshida

Ohkuri

Jyotaki

et al. 2009

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

171

159

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Endocannabinoids such as anandamide [N-arachidonoylethanolamine (AEA)] and 2-arachidonoyl glycerol (2-AG) are known orexigenic mediators that act via CB 1 receptors in hypothalamus and limbic forebrain to induce appetite and stimulate food intake. Circulating endocannabinoid levels inversely correlate with plasma levels of leptin, an anorexigenic mediator that reduces food intake by acting on hypothalamic receptors. Recently, taste has been found to be a peripheral target of leptin. Leptin selectively suppresses sweet taste responses in wild-type mice but not in leptin receptor-deficient db/db mice. Here, we show that endocannabinoids oppose the action of leptin to act as enhancers of sweet taste. We found that administration of AEA or 2-AG increases gustatory nerve responses to sweeteners in a concentration-dependent manner without affecting responses to salty, sour, bitter, and umami compounds. The cannabinoids increase behavioral responses to sweet-bitter mixtures and electrophysiological responses of taste receptor cells to sweet compounds. Mice genetically lacking CB 1 receptors show no enhancement by endocannnabinoids of sweet taste responses at cellular, nerve, or behavioral levels. In addition, the effects of endocannabinoids on sweet taste responses of taste cells are diminished by AM251, a CB 1 receptor antagonist, but not by AM630, a CB 2 receptor antagonist. Immunohistochemistry shows that CB 1 receptors are expressed in type II taste cells that also express the T1r3 sweet taste receptor component. Taken together, these observations suggest that the taste organ is a peripheral target of endocannabinoids. Reciprocal regulation of peripheral sweet taste reception by endocannabinoids and leptin may contribute to their opposing actions on food intake and play an important role in regulating energy homeostasis.energy homeostasis | gustation | reciprocal regulation E ndocannabinoids such as anandamide [N-arachidonoylethanolamine (AEA)] and 2-arachidonoyl glycerol (2-AG) are known orexigenic mediators that act via CB 1 receptors in hypothalamus and limbic forebrain to induce appetite (1, 2) and stimulate food intake (3). Systemic administration of exogenous cannabinoids or endocannabinoids in rodents causes hyperphagia (4) and increases the preference for palatable substances such as sucrose solution or food pellets (5, 6). These effects are mediated by the CB 1 receptor: pretreatment with the CB 1 antagonist SR141716 inhibited hyperphagia and reduced consumption of both bland and palatable foods (4-6). The natural "liking" reactions of rats to sweet compounds were amplified by endogenous cannabinoid signals in nucleus accumbens (7). Thus, endocannabinoids may be related to hedonic aspects of sweet taste.There is growing evidence that taste function can be modulated by hormones or other factors that act on receptors present in the peripheral gustatory system. Leptin, an anorexigenic mediator that reduces food intake by acting on hypothalamic receptors (8), selectively suppresses sweet taste responses and th...

show abstract

“…In the peripheral taste organ, CB 1 immnoreactivity was observed in fewer than 12% of GAD67-expressing TCs, which in mice are thought to be presynaptic cells (28) (Fig. 4B and Table S1).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Endocannabinoids selectively enhance sweet taste

Yoshida

Ohkuri

Jyotaki

et al. 2009

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

171

159

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Each taste bud consists of 50 to 120 sensory cells that project a number of microvilli that reach the mucus layer of the tongue (Dulac 2000;Matsunami and Amrein 2003). Four different types of cell have been characterized to constitute a taste bud; three taste-type cells (I, II and III) and one basal-type cells believed to be a progenitor of the other three (DeFazio et al 2006;Romanov and Kolesnikov 2006). Renewal of taste cells from the basal cells seems to occur every 10 to 15 d (Farbman 1980).…”

Section: Taste (Gustation)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Renewal of taste cells from the basal cells seems to occur every 10 to 15 d (Farbman 1980). Type I taste cells might be soursensing, while type II are the taste receptor cells for sweet, umami and bitter (DeFazio et al 2006;Romanov and Kolesnikov 2006). In contrast, type III taste cells are distinguished by their capacity to form synapses with sensory neurons (DeFazio et al 2006;Romanov and Kolesnikov 2006).…”

Section: Taste (Gustation)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Type I taste cells might be soursensing, while type II are the taste receptor cells for sweet, umami and bitter (DeFazio et al 2006;Romanov and Kolesnikov 2006). In contrast, type III taste cells are distinguished by their capacity to form synapses with sensory neurons (DeFazio et al 2006;Romanov and Kolesnikov 2006). Signal transduction to sensory neurons appears to be solely relegated to type III cells playing and intermediate signaling role between the true taste cells (type I and II) and the sensory neurons (Palmer 2007).…”

Section: Taste (Gustation)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Unfolding the codes of short-term feed appetence in farm and companion animals. A comparative oronasal nutrient sensing biology review

Roura¹,

Humphrey²,

Tedó³

et al. 2008

Can. J. Anim. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Roura, E., Humphrey, B., Tedo´, G. and Ipharraguerre, I. 2008. Unfolding the codes of short-term feed appetence in farm and companion animals. A comparative oronasal nutrient sensing biology review. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 88: 535Á558. The evolution of the chemical senses has resulted in a sensory apparatus for high taste and smell acuity in mammals and birds to ensure self-nourishment. Such peripheral chemosensory systems function as a code to unfold the nutritional value of feedstuffs. Food ingestion simultaneously evokes odor, taste and thermo-mechanical (somatosensing) sensations. Olfaction represents the capacity to identify feed volatiles that are predominantly derived from essential nutrients in plants.Comparative biology of olfaction shows that primates and chickens have a smaller olfactory epithelium and fewer olfactory receptor (OR) genes than non-primate mammals studied to date including farm and companion animals, such as the pig, the cow, the dog, the cat and the horse. A significant proportion of the total OR genes in mammals and birds have lost their functionality (pseudogenes) in a process that seems to reflect a decrease in the animal's reliance on the sense of smell, particularly in humans and cows. The taste system allows animals to recognize a diverse repertoire of nutrient (sugars, amino acids, salts, acids and fats) or toxic related chemical entities that provide valuable information about the quality of food. Taste senses non-volatile molecules in the oral cavity through taste receptors (TR). The TR are expressed in the sensory cells forming the taste buds of the tongue's papillae. Taste cells are linked to a network of solitary chemosensory cells diffused through many non-taste tissues involved in metabolic homeostasis. The number of functional taste receptor genes (TASR) in humans is equivalent to that in other mammals and superior to that in chickens. The TASR family 1 (TAS1R coding for umami and sweet TR) is conserved, in number and type, across the species evaluated, with the exception of the sweet receptor in chicken and feline species. The TASR family 2 (TAS2R coding for bitter TR) shows a strong adaptive capacity to dietary sources and digestive physiology across vertebrates. Pseudogenization (loss of gene functionality) in the TAS2R family seems to be a frequent strategy. The implications of oronasal nutrient sensing related to comparative animal feeding strategies and behaviors such as neophobia, feed refusal and hedonic preferences are discussed. Feed palatability and appetence might be one of the main driving forces in short-term feed consumption. Finally, practical applications relevant to animal production are outlined.Key words: Nutrient sensing, taste, olfaction, somatosensing, feed intake, farm, companion animals Roura, E., Humphrey, B., Tedo´, G. et Ipharraguerre, I. 2008. Le code de l'appe´tence a`court terme chez les animaux domestiques et de compagnie. Biologie comparative de la de´tection bucco-nasale des e´le´ments nutritifs. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 88: 535Á558. En e´voluant, ...

show abstract

“…11) Type-II cells are responsible for the detection of sweet, bitter, or umami tastes 12,13) ; they do not form conventional synapses and appear to release ATP as a transmitter, which in turn appears to activate closely associated nerve afferents expressing P2X receptors 14,15) and adjacent taste cells expressing P2Y receptors. 16,17) Type-III cells that mediate sour taste transduction are "presynaptic," 18,19) forming synaptic contacts with the intragemmal nerve fibers, and are thought to use serotonin (5-HT) as a neurotransmitter.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Molecular mechanisms underlying the reception and transmission of sour taste information

Ishimaru

2015

Bioscience, Biotechnology, and Biochemistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Taste enables organisms to determine the properties of ingested substances by conveying information regarding the five basic taste modalities: sweet, salty, sour, bitter, and umami. The sweet, salty, and umami taste modalities convey the carbohydrate, electrolyte, and glutamate content of food, indicating its desirability and stimulating appetitive responses. The sour and bitter modalities convey the acidity of food and the presence of potential toxins, respectively, stimulating aversive responses to such tastes. In recent years, the receptors mediating sweet, bitter, and umami tastes have been identified as members of the T1R and T2R G-protein-coupled receptor families; however, the molecular mechanisms underlying sour taste detection have yet to be clearly elucidated. This review covers the molecular mechanisms proposed to mediate the detection and transmission of sour stimuli, focusing on polycystic kidney disease 1-like 3 (Pkd1l3), Pkd2l1, and carbonic anhydrase 4 (Car4).

show abstract

Separate Populations of Receptor Cells and Presynaptic Cells in Mouse Taste Buds

Cited by 253 publications

References 55 publications

Endocannabinoids selectively enhance sweet taste

Endocannabinoids selectively enhance sweet taste

Unfolding the codes of short-term feed appetence in farm and companion animals. A comparative oronasal nutrient sensing biology review

Molecular mechanisms underlying the reception and transmission of sour taste information

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About