The Maintenance Diets of C57BL/6J and 129X1/SvJ Mice Influence Their Taste Solution Preferences: Implications for Large-Scale Phenotyping Projects

Abstract

We examined the extent to which maintenance diet influences the taste preferences of mice. C57BL/6J (B6) and 129X1/SvJ (129) mice were fed one of three standard cereal-based diets (Teklad 8604, Zeigler NIH-07, Purina 5001), a cereal-based diet formulated for breeding (Purina 5015), or two purified diets (AIN-76A or AIN-93G). The mice were given 48-h two-bottle choice tests between water and the following seven taste solutions: 2 mmol/L saccharin, 5 mmol/L citric acid, 50 mmol/L citric acid, 30 micro mol/L quinine hydrochloride (QHCl), 300 micro mol/L QHCl, 75 mmol/L NaCl, and 10% ethanol. There were very few differences in taste solution preference scores among mice of the same strain fed the three different versions of standard cereal-based diet. There were also very few differences in taste solution preference scores between mice of the same strain fed the two purified diets. However, the mice fed standard cereal-based diets generally drank more water and total fluid than did mice fed purified diets. There were larger differences between the B6 and 129 strains in saccharin and ethanol preference scores with mice fed standard cereal-based diets than purified diets. Conversely, there were larger differences between the B6 and 129 strains in citric acid and NaCl preference scores with mice fed purified diets than standard cereal-based diets. These results show that maintenance diet composition can have strain-dependent effects on taste solution preference. They illustrate that attention must be paid to the effects of diet on phenotype in screens of mutagenized mice and other genetic studies.

Preferences of 14 rat strains for 17 taste compounds

“…Relative to typical laboratory chows this diet has a slightly higher energy density (15.9 vs. ~13 kJ/g), roughly equivalent fat content (~12% of total energy in each case), less protein (20% vs. ~29% of total energy), and more carbohydrate (68% vs. ~59% of total energy) with the largest difference being that most of the carbohydrate in AIN-76A is provided as sucrose whereas that in chow is provided as starch. Based on comparisons made in mice (82,87), the AIN-76A diet appears to be more "obesigenic" than chow but not nearly as much as the semisynthetic high fat diets typically used to produce obesity. We found marked strain and sex differences in body weight that became larger as the rats aged.…”

The ‘Novel’‘Uncoupling’ Proteins UCP2 and UCP3: What Do They Really do? Pros and Cons for Suggested Functions

“…Thus, the chromosomal region carrying the manipulated UCP2 gene (and other regions) will come from the 129Sv mouse, and if other important genes for obesity/diabetes are located on these regions, they will co-segregate with the UCP2-ablated gene. There are studies concerning 129Sv versus C57Bl/6 mice strains that clearly demonstrate differences in feeding behaviour and body weight control (Bachmanov et al 2001;Tordoff et al 2002). It is also noteworthy that the C57Bl/6 strain is notoriously 'obesity-prone' (West et al 1992;Surwit et al 1998) and 129Sv is 'lean' (Taylor & Phillips, 1996).…”

Assessment of the Effects of 6 Standard Rodent Diets on Binge-Like and Voluntary Ethanol Consumption in Male C57BL/6J Mice

“…Moreover, dietary supplements have been shown to influence alcohol-induced changes in peripheral organ systems which could indirectly affect alcohol-related behaviors including ethanol consumption (Tang et al, 2009, Keshavarzian et al, 2001). Maintenance diet can even influence gustatory preferences (Tordoff et al, 2002), which could also influence ethanol consumption (Kampov-Polevoy et al, 1990, Sinclair et al, 1992). Both direct and indirect effects of rodent diet on behavior warrants further exploration of the specific impact of diet on ethanol consumption and ethanol-induced neurobiological responses.…”