Back

Does flavor-nutrient learning promote or protect against diet-induced obesity? Individual differences in conditionability predict resistance to weight gain in rats.

Myers, K. P.

2026-04-15 neuroscience
10.64898/2026.04.12.718046 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Flavor-nutrient learning (FNL) refers to learning associations between a foods flavor and the rewarding appetition signals that arise from post-oral nutrient sensing during or after a meal. In rodent models FNL reliably produces strong flavor preferences and increased intake of nutrient-paired flavors, implicating FNL as a presumptive obesogenic influence in the modern environment. However, evidence that FNL plays a causal role in diet-induced obesity is ambiguous. We have previously shown that degree of weight gain on a high-fat/sugar diet is associated with stronger FNL responses, but direction of causation was unclear. This paper reports three experiments investigating whether individual differences in FNL conditionability are linked to obesity proneness prior to obesity onset. Two experiments comparing selectively-bred obesity-prone vs resistant strains found no strain differences in FNL. A third study in lean, outbred rats evaluated whether baseline individual differences in FNL prospectively predict weight gain on a cafeteria diet. Unexpectedly, rats who showed the strongest learned increase in intake of a nutrient-paired flavor subsequently gained the least weight when switched to cafeteria diet, suggesting FNL protects against weight gain. In fact, individual differences in FNL explained a portion of variance in cafeteria weight gain over and above measured kcal intake, implying a function for FNL in adaptively modulating metabolic responses to energy intake. Collectively, several studies have now shown individual differences in obesity proneness to be either positively correlated, uncorrelated, or negatively correlated with FNL, calling for a more nuanced view of how appetition influences intake and energy balance.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Molecular Metabolism
105 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
23.4%
2
International Journal of Obesity
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
19.4%
3
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 16%
5.0%
4
Cell Reports
1338 papers in training set
Top 11%
4.5%
50% of probability mass above
5
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 38%
3.7%
6
Current Biology
596 papers in training set
Top 6%
3.2%
7
Diabetes
53 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.0%
8
Appetite
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.2%
9
eneuro
389 papers in training set
Top 5%
2.0%
10
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 56%
1.8%
11
The Journal of Physiology
134 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.8%
12
The Journal of Neuroscience
928 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.4%
13
Nature Metabolism
56 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
14
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 36%
1.4%
15
Physiology & Behavior
30 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.3%
16
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 59%
1.3%
17
Biological Psychiatry
119 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.2%
18
The Journal of Nutrition
21 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.2%
19
Nature
575 papers in training set
Top 13%
1.0%
20
Cell Metabolism
49 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
21
Frontiers in Endocrinology
53 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
22
Neuropsychopharmacology
134 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
23
PLOS Biology
408 papers in training set
Top 18%
0.8%
24
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
341 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
25
Science Advances
1098 papers in training set
Top 32%
0.7%
26
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 36%
0.7%
27
Obesity
19 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.5%
28
Developmental Cell
168 papers in training set
Top 13%
0.5%
29
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.5%
30
Nature Neuroscience
216 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.5%