Sweet Taste Receptor Signaling Network: Possible Implication for Cognitive Functioning

Welcome, M. Osain; Mastorakis, Nikos E.; Переверзев, В. А.

doi:10.1155/2015/606479

Cited by 31 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 152 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…All of these signal cascade components are commonplace for chemosensory transduction. Unlike TAS2R receptors, TAS1Rs cause intracellular signaling via gap junctions and paracrine communications that cause adjacent cells to translocate proteins for glucose transportation (Welcome et al, 2015 ). In fact, it was the identification of α-gustducin (Hofer et al, 1996 ), and later taste receptors themselves, in brush cells located in the stomach and intestine that confirmed the presence of taste receptors outside the mouth.…”

Section: Taste Receptorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Olfactory, Taste, and Photo Sensory Receptors in Non-sensory Organs: It Just Makes Sense

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sensory receptors that detect and respond to light, taste, and smell primarily belong to the G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) superfamily. In addition to their established roles in the nose, tongue, and eyes, these sensory GPCRs have been found in many ‘non-sensory' organs where they respond to different physicochemical stimuli, initiating signaling cascades in these extrasensory systems. For example, taste receptors in the airway, and photoreceptors in vascular smooth muscle cells, both cause smooth muscle relaxation when activated. In addition, olfactory receptors are present within the vascular system, where they play roles in angiogenesis as well as in modulating vascular tone. By better understanding the physiological and pathophysiological roles of sensory receptors in non-sensory organs, novel therapeutic agents can be developed targeting these receptors, ultimately leading to treatments for pathological conditions and potential cures for various disease states.

show abstract

Section: Taste Receptorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Olfactory, Taste, and Photo Sensory Receptors in Non-sensory Organs: It Just Makes Sense

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Subjective sweetness and pleasantness ratings differed among the preloads; however, it is unlikely these factors were primary determinants of FI. It has been suggested that sweetness may increase appetite due to the stimulation of gut taste receptors [ 36 ]. Importantly however, although the fruit drink was rated significantly sweeter than cola, test meal and cumulative FI did not differ between these beverages.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Commercially Available Sugar-Sweetened Beverages on Subjective Appetite and Short-Term Food Intake in Boys

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is unclear whether sugar sweetened beverages bypass regulatory controls of food intake (FI) in boys. The objective of the present study was to determine the effects of isovolumetric preloads (350 mL) of a fruit-flavoured drink (154 kcal), cola (158 kcal), 1% M.F. chocolate milk (224 kcal), and water (0 kcal) on subjective appetite and FI in boys aged 9–14 years. On four separate mornings, boys consumed one of the preloads in a random order; subjective appetite was measured at 15 min intervals, and FI was measured via an ad libitum pizza lunch at 60 min post-beverage consumption. In the 32 boys (age: 11.8 ± 0.3 years), FI was reduced (p < 0.001) after cola (940 ± 46 kcal) and chocolate milk (878 ± 41 kcal) compared with the water control (1048 ± 35 kcal) and after chocolate milk compared to the fruit drink (1005 ± 44 kcal). Cumulative FI after the fruit drink was greater than the water control (1159 ± 44 vs. 1048 ± 35 kcal; p = 0.03). Average appetite was not affected by the treatment, but the cola treatment resulted in greater fullness (p = 0.04) and lower prospective food consumption (p = 0.004) compared with the fruit drink. In conclusion, chocolate milk and cola suppressed next-meal FI at 60 min, while fruit drink increased cumulative FI (beverage + next meal) over 60 min in boys. Results from this study suggest that beverage composition is an important determinant of FI suppression in boys.

show abstract

“…Another phenomenon captured in our study involves the possible mechanism by which sucralose exerts its effects on classical and nonclassical monocytes in healthy young adults. Sweet taste of sucralose and other caloric and noncaloric sweeteners is mediated by G protein-coupled receptors (GPCR) T1R1, T1R2, and T1R3 [38]. Sweet taste receptors were firstly described in the gut [39], enteroendocrine cells, and pancreas [40].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Single 48 mg Sucralose Sip Unbalances Monocyte Subpopulations and Stimulates Insulin Secretion in Healthy Young Adults

Gómez-Arauz

Bueno‐Hernández

Palomera

et al. 2019

Journal of Immunology Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sucralose is a noncaloric artificial sweetener that is widely consumed worldwide and has been associated with alteration in glucose and insulin homeostasis. Unbalance in monocyte subpopulations expressing CD11c and CD206 hallmarks metabolic dysfunction but has not yet been studied in response to sucralose. Our goal was to examine the effect of a single sucralose sip on serum insulin and blood glucose and the percentages of classical, intermediate, and nonclassical monocytes in healthy young adults subjected to an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). This study was a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Volunteers randomly received 60 mL water as placebo (n=20) or 48 mg sucralose dissolved in 60 mL water (n=25), fifteen minutes prior to an OGTT. Blood samples were individually drawn every 15 minutes for 180 minutes for quantifying glucose and insulin concentrations. Monocyte subsets expressing CD11c and CD206 were measured at -15 and 180 minutes by flow cytometry. As compared to controls, volunteers receiving sucralose exhibited significant increases in serum insulin at 30, 45, and 180 minutes, whereas blood glucose values showed no significant differences. Sucralose consumption caused a significant 7% increase in classical monocytes and 63% decrease in nonclassical monocytes with respect to placebo controls. Pearson’s correlation models revealed a strong association of insulin with sucralose-induced monocyte subpopulation unbalance whereas glucose values did not show significant correlations. Sucralose ingestion decreased CD11c expression in all monocyte subsets and reduced CD206 expression in nonclassical monocytes suggesting that sucralose does not only unbalance monocyte subpopulations but also alter their expression pattern of cell surface molecules. This work demonstrates for the first time that a 48 mg sucralose sip increases serum insulin and unbalances monocyte subpopulations expressing CD11c and CD206 in noninsulin-resistant healthy young adults subjected to an OGTT. The apparently innocuous consumption of sucralose should be reexamined in light of these results.

show abstract

Sweet Taste Receptor Signaling Network: Possible Implication for Cognitive Functioning

Cited by 31 publications

References 152 publications

Olfactory, Taste, and Photo Sensory Receptors in Non-sensory Organs: It Just Makes Sense

Olfactory, Taste, and Photo Sensory Receptors in Non-sensory Organs: It Just Makes Sense

Effect of Commercially Available Sugar-Sweetened Beverages on Subjective Appetite and Short-Term Food Intake in Boys

A Single 48 mg Sucralose Sip Unbalances Monocyte Subpopulations and Stimulates Insulin Secretion in Healthy Young Adults

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About