THESIS '3". ‘fiir-A LL“... ..\ .-‘ ...3 K‘H'Aav' . . . N" \ '7..::_'“!‘.ER‘~‘lTY L «pf Lixutjll‘x‘C, iii-12.51“. 4-3524 This is to certify that the thesis entitled Comparison of Hypothalamic Serotonergic Activity in Relation to Feeding and Strain Differences in Dietary Obesity Susceptible (OM) and Resistant (SSB/Pl) Rats presented by Thomas Karr Custer has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for MS degree in m. . @144 [.4 flrzinmmi, Major professor Date _Eehnuar_y_ll,_1984 0-7639 MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution _——— -. - - 7 7w . ._ —. — - _ 7 *7 MSU RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to LIBRARIES remove this checkout from “ your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. (~ ' fa." E 1 V an“: ? (a f “n. f?“ :‘h i. .1 j r “7r .. g :E .' - 3 f' . .' - l r ,;. ';_"_" 9. .uj' - ‘W'E. .v' L. - ’3. CL.) “A: a a 1&9 .1. lag-.3" 1.357.371; ‘ : . COMPARISON OF HYPOTHALAMIC SEROTONERGIC ACTIVITY IN RELATION TO FEEDING AND STRAIN DIFFERENCES IN DIETARY OBESITY SUSCEPTIBLE (ON) AND RESISTANT (SSS/PL) RATS BY Thomas Karr Custer A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition 1983 ABSTRACT COMPARISON OF HYPOTHALAMIC SEROTONERGIC ACTIVITY IN RELATION TO FEEDING AND STRAIN DIFFERENCES IN DIETARY OBESITY SUSCEPTIBLE (OM) AND RESISTANT (SSB/PL) RATS By Thomas Karr Custer Serotonergic stimulation has been linked with reduced energy intake in rats. Whether hypothalamic serotonergic activity measured by 5-HT production is greater in SSB/Pl (S) rats (dietary obesity resistant) than Osborne-Mendell (OM) rats (non-dietary obesity resistant) was tested. Each strain was divided into three groups: Fed Drug (pargyline, a MAO inhibitor), Non-Fed and Fed Sham. All rats were fed an energy-dense, high-fat diet and were adapted to eat a 2- hour meal every 2“ hours. 5-HT accumulation was measured at 0, 20, AD, and 60 minutes post drug or sham injection to calculate 5-HT accumulation rate (b1L. S rats ate less food than the OM during a 20 minute period prior to killing (p < CLOS). Greater serotonergic activity was indicated in S Non-Fed rats (23.86 ng/g/min) than S Fed (12308 ng/g/min) (p < 0.10), while the 0M Non-Fed vs. Fed showed no differ- ence (15.94 and 12.87 ng/g/min respectively) thus giving qualified support to the hypothesis. Dedicated to my parents. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank Dr. Schemmel and Dr. Romsos for their patient assistance in the day-to-day problems that arise in carving out a research project. Also, I would like to thank my other committee members, Dr. Beck and Dr. Bond, for their ideas which were essential for the planning and carrying out of this project. .Also, I would like to thank Dr. Vandertuig for helping me troubleshoot problems on the HPLC and Dr. Gill for applying his expertise to my statistical problems. This research was supported, in part, by an AURG. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES o o o o o o o I o o o o o o o. o o o 0 LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . INTRODUCTION 0 o o o o o o o o o o 0 o o o o c o _o 0 LITERATURE REVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-HT Metabolism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Drug Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Brain Lesions or 5-HT Depletion . . . . . Serotonergic Stimulation and Food Choices Diet Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AN APPROACH TO ASSESSING SEROTONERGIC ACTIVITY . . . Serotonergic Activity and Feeding . . . . . . . The Dietary Model of Obesity . . . . . . . . . Measuring Serotonergic Activity . . . . . . . . Objectives 0 I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 MATERIALS AND METHODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Experimental DeSign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Food Intake . . . . .°. . . . . . . . . . . . . Injection and.Sacrifice . . . . . . . . . . . . Dissection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv vi vii (D004: 11 13 13 14 1A 18 19 19 23 23 24 MATERIALS AND METHODS (Cont.) Sample Analysis . Statistics . . RESULTS . . . . . . . Body Weights . . Food Intakes . . 5-HT Accumulation 5-HIAA Decline . Hypothalamus Weights Mean Level At Each Time O-Time Values 60 Min. Values Effect of Pargyline . DISCUSSION . . . . . . Omission of Fed Sham Choice of Statistical SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS POSSIBLE FOLLOW-UP STUDIES APPENDIX . . . . . . . BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . Method 2a 26 28 28 28 28 42 A7 147 A7 ll? 53 5A 59 59 60 62 6A 67 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1 - Composition of the High Fat Diet . . . . . TABLE 2 - Comparison of Mean 5-HT Accumulation Rate in OM and S Rats with Different Fed & Drug States 0 O O O O 0 O O O O O 0 I I O I O 0 TABLE 3 - ANOVA for Estimations of D1 or 5-HT Accumulation Rate Based on One Sample Per Time Paint 0 O O O O O O O O O I O O O O 0 TABLE 4 - Comparison of 5-HIAA Decline Over Time in OM and S Rats with Different Fed and Drug States 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 TABLE 5 - Amount of 5-HT (ng/gm) in Hypothalamus at TABLE TABLE Zero Time in OM & S Rats . . . . . . ANOVA for 0 Time Values of 5-HT . . Mean ¢S.E.M. at Zero Time 5-HIAA Levels in OM & S Rats . . . . . .,. . . . . ANOVA for 0 Time Values in all Treatment Groups or 5-HIAA o o o o o o o o o 0 Amount of 5-HT (ng/gm) in the Hypothalamus 60 Min. Post Injection in OM and S Rats ANOVA of Values in all Treatment Groups 60 Min. Post Injection 5-HT Levels . vi 50 50 51 51 52 52 'FIGURE FIGURE FIGURE FIGURE FIGURE FIGURE FIGURE FIGURE FIGURE FIGURE 10 Diagram of Metabolic Pathways of LIST OF FIGURES S-Hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) Illustration of Cross Classified Factors in Experimental Design . Fed vs. Non-Fed Comparison of 5-HT Accumulation in the S Rat After Injection of Pargyline . Fed vs. Non-Fed Comparison of 5-HT Accumulation Rate in the OM Rat After Injection of Pargyline . Strain Comparison of 5-HT Accumulation Rate in the Fed State After Injection of Pargyline Strain Comparison of S-HT Accumulation in the Fed State After Injection of Vehicle . Strain Comparison of 5-HT Accumulation in the Non-Fed State After Injection of Pargyline Fed Drug vs. Fed Sham Comparison of 5-HT Accumulation in the S Rat Fed Drug vs. Fed Sham Comparison of 5-HT Accumulation in OM Rats Bar Graph of Mean $8.0. 5-HT Accumu- lated in Each Treatment Group at Each Time Point vii 22 31 33 35. 37 39 A1 AA 49 INTRODUCTION Reports of the role of serotonin as a neurotransmitter that mediates satiety have become more common in the scien- tific and lay press recently. The relationship of seroto- nergic activity and food intake has been studied through two major routes: pharmacological manipulation of serotonergic activity and the effect of diet on serotonin (5-HT) levels in the brain. Before discussing these two aspects, basic 5- HT metabolism will be reviewed. LITERATURE REVIEW W The precursor to serotonin, tryptophan (Trp), an essen- tial amino acid, crosses the blood brain barrier by means of active transport (see Figure 1). Trp competes with other neutral amino acids (naa) for this transport so the rate at which it is carried into the neuron is dependent on the Trpznaa ratio (Wurtman et al., '76; Curson '81; Boadle- Biber, '82). Inside the neuron trptophan hydroxylase (TH) catalyzes the first step in the production of 5-HT by hydroxylation of Trp to form 5-HTP. Then an aromatic amino acid decarboxylase catalyzes the step to 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT). The step catalyzed by tryptophan hydroxylase is Figure 1: Diagram of the Metabolic Pathways of 5-Hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) €050: 32.002 hIImA‘ :hto coco: O<2 unmixoncaooo .»:-nAw uhzuo 0.0.335»: 23.30.53... . U. Canaan: 02.00 ‘ ac... ogm.>.._.._a>.o:.:o.. u .< 0.10). 28 29 @003 moumam coguooncfl can pom cmz3 in pmuammcm uoz mz mq.muvm.m~ m~.~ufim.~ om.mnam.- In pm~>_mcm uoz ..od.ova oo.mnom.m~ SO m~.~nom.m oe.mumo.- .maau> .5": I (omxoin \Of‘KDLn $3051" @500 emaicoz no .uzmdmzoo mcflmuum cmuzuon c230u mos Docmumuuflp oz... N\ m B umnwu H. fiCOhflNCOfi—ai .z.m.m H was mo2~m>a ow om so om Emzm $9.0 Emzm wane mocmofiwwcmfim comicoz com mewommm uo macaw .cfie\m\m:u«n. omofim no aznm uo cQaum~=Esoo¢ ucflom mafia some on mums mo Cones: fies umom a“: occasmoue mono mcbmum onto a com Decommufio can: mama m cam 20 :w mews um>o :o«um~sesoo< azum mo cOmAAmaeou m mamca 30 Figure 3: Fed vs. Non-Fed Comparison of 5-HT Accumulation in the S Rat After Injection of Pargyline. 5HT/HYPOTHALAMUS (nglg) 4400 A. 4008. 3600 3200 2800 . 2400 . 2000 . 1600 . 1200 ' NONFED, b ----A FED 31 S DRUG 1= 23.86 ng/min b1: 12.08 nol min - ' U 20 40 60 POST INJECTION (min) Figure 3 32 ‘ Figure 4: Fed vs. Non-Fed Comparison of 5-HT Accumulation Rate in the 0M Rat After Injection of Pargyline. 5HTIHYPOTHALAMJS (ng/g) 3600 b 3200 280 2400 2000 1800 1200 33 OM DRUG "'— ‘3 NON FED, b1= 15.94ng/min ——- a FED, b1 =12.87 ng/min I I l 0 20- 40 60 POST INJECTION (min) Figure 4 34 Figure 5: Strain Comparison of 5-HT Accumulation Rate in the Fed State After Injection of Pargyline. 5HT/HYPOTHALAMUS (nglg) 4000 _ —'-_ 3600 3200 , 2800 . 2400 . 2000 . 35 FED DRUG a s . b1= 12.08ng/min -....- . OM, b1=12.87ng/min 9 D \ n \ \ \ \ \ \ \ D p .9 55D DD. ’\ \ 0 20 40 60 POST INJECTION (min) Figure 5 36 Figure 6: Strain Comparison of 5-HT Accumulation Rate in the Fed State After Injection of Vehicle. 5HT/HYPOTHALAMUS (ng/g) 37 FEDSHAM ——-O S b1 =3.80nglmin 3200 -----~ 0 0M h1 a1.31nglmin 280 2400 o o . o o o o o . . g 200 o 0 __°__, . :f' ___:IF ________ 0.. ________ ..° 0 o 1600 . o 3 2 o . . o 0 ml . 4 I O 20 4O 60 POST MOTION (min) Figure 6 38 Figure 7: Strain Comparison of 5-HT Accumulation Rate in the Non-Fed State After Injection of Pargyline. 5HTIHYPOTHALAMUS (ng/g) 4400 S 39 NON FED DRUG . '—"—"' ' 3. b1 =23.86nglmin ---- 9 0M, b1215.94nglmin I 36001, a 3200 2800 24OO_ 2000 . fl T r I 0 20 40 so POST INJECTION (min) Figure 7 AO Figure 8: Fed Drug vs. Fed Sham Comparison of 5-HT Accumulation Rate in the S Rat. 41 s FED 4000, -—~ DRUG b1=12.08ng/min 3600 . --- o SHAM b1= 3.08ng/min A A E" a 3200. 4 5 a, A g 2800. A < .J 5:: . 2400. A 8 . z/ 1 g 2 : : 3 : D 000 .. . _______ 43 ------ -: I " ________ -2“ . . IO :0 1600. ' O . O I2OOJ. a - o l I 20 40 go— POST INJECTION (min) Figure 8 42 In the Fed state the 5-HT accumulation rate was similar in the 0M and S rat whether or not they were injected with pargyline (Figures 5 & 6, respectively). In the Non-Fed drug state the slope of the S rat was 7.92 ng/g min. greater than the 0M rat. However, due to high variability, the difference was not significant. Comparison of Fed drug vs. sham injections in the Fed state within Strains (Figure 8 for S, and Figure 9 for CM) produced a slope in the drug group that was 8.28 ng/g min. greater and 11.56 ng/g min. greater in the S and 0M rat, respectively. These differences in the 5-HT accumulation rate were not significant. The analysis of variance on individual slopes is pre- sented in Table 3. The F value indicated a significant variation in treatments. The Bonferoni T for nonorthoganal multiple comparisons on the average b1 for a test group, did not shOw a difference in any of the comparisons that were done on slopes calculated for a whole test group. Only the Non-Fed drug groups from both strains combined vs. the Fed Sham groups from both strains were able to produce a signifi- cant difference (p < 0.05). 5:fllAA.Decline Comparisons of S-HIAA decline expressed as slope are presented in Table 4. 'No comparison of strain within treat- ment (Fed Drug, Non-Fed Drug, or Fed Sham) produced a dif- ference with the Bonferoni T test. Nor did the slopes appear to have any relation to their S-HT counterparts which 43 Figure 9: Fed State Drug vs. Sham Comparison of 5-HT Accumulation Rate in CM Rats. SHT/HYPOTHALAMUS (nglg) 360 3200 2800 . 2400 . 2000 . 1600 . 1200 K‘ —--- O 44 OM FED DRUG b1=12.87ng/min SHAM h1 = 1.31 ng/min 20 40 POST INJECTION (min) Figure 9 b}. 45 TABLE 3 ANOVA for Estimations of b or S-HT Accumulation Rate Based on One Sample Per Time Point Source of Variation df MS F Strain l 74.46 .3560 Treatments 2 1200.32 5.739* Interaction 2 214.00 1.0236 Error 30 209.14 46 .ucmbmzoo cum; mmumum vamp cam new con3 mzflmcum cmoaumn cczou mm: mocwumuuwo oz«a« .mfi~u> .5": .~\ m a Oman 9 aceswucom.. .z.m.mfi mum mm3~m>a om om I‘mf‘O I- em~>_m:m scz m¢.~uom.a- ow om oxoqun h\or~h m2 mo.~u~s.ou “n.2uma.aI 20 I hrflF-h o v II emwximcm Doz am.~nvs.o “)4me a a I I s cm m2 om.d.-.m- No.~.am.n- a O Umhtcoz U h Jm\mm m Emzm mono Emzm mama mocmoduacmdm pmmIcoz com unwom mafia he“ mcficomm mo macaw comm um mum» umom uo umbeaz ca: .:«E\m\mcwnn. mmo~m no mca~omo DEOEDmmub mono mwbmbm mane can can Demumuuao as“: muwm m sea so cfl a no cede um>o ocwfiooo ¢<~=Im com: uo comwumdeou v mam<8 47 may be due to the large standard error in relation to the absolute values of the slopes. The Fed Drug vs. Non-Fed Drug treatment comparison within strains shows no differences and do not appear related to their 5-HT counterparts for reasons indicated above. The Fed Drug vs. Fed Sham comparison did not show any difference though the declines appear to be greater in the drug group. Wants The S SB/P1 rat had an average hypothalamus weight of 47.1 g 0.9 mg while the 0M rat had 50.4 31.1 mg. The differences were significant with 95% confidence (n = 154). W The mean 5-HT levels at each time point in each group 1 the standard deviation are presented in Figure 10. W. The mean amounts 1 S.E.M. of 5-HT and S-HIAA and ANOVA are presented in Tables 5 and 6,'respec- tively. ANOVA results indicate that the values were similar in each group for both 5-HT and S-HIAA. QQ_flin._lalne§. The mean 60 minute post injection values and the ANOVA is presented in Table 7. The F value for treatments was significantly different. A Bonferoni T test for the following four non-orthoganal comparisons was done: Fed vs. Non-Fed strains combined, Fed Drug vs. Fed Sham strains combined, S Fed Drug vs S Non-Fed Drug, and OM Fed Drug vs. 0M Non-Fed Drug. The Fed Drug vs. Fed Sham comparison was the only one that was significant (P < 0.01) 48 Figure 10. Bar Graph of Mean 1 3.0. S-HT Accumulated in Each Treatment Group at Each Time Point. 49 I— J ' fi................ 9 r . ... ........‘ I.LJ.L.Q.IIAA % I n g 1 L L ... ' fv‘.......... ..... L J r _' 0. 000000000... I [:3 NON-FED DRUG E3723 FED DRUG - FED SHAM .9. w...... l. 1P OJ 3200 2800 240 T 200:. 1600 (616“) ShWV‘IVHlOdAH/lHQ Figure 10 40 20 60 40 20 POST INJECTION (min) Amount of 5-HT* in the Hypothalamus at Zero Time in OM & S Rats 50 TABLE 5 5-HT (No/g) Treatment OM Fed Drug 1967193* 21141118 Non-Fed Drug 20091156 20161164 Fed Sham 1807196 18331109 *Mean 1_S.E.M. ANOVA for 0 Time S-HT Values for All Treatment Groups Source of Variation df MS F Strain 1 1354 .0133 Treatments 2 9102.5 .0898 Interaction 2 796.3 .0079 Error 30 101,403 51 TABLE 6 Amount of 5-HIAA in the Hypothalamus at Zero Time in the OM & S Rats S-HIAA in hypothalamus at 0 Time (Ne/g) Treatment OM S Fed Drug 847.1346 884.1113 Non-Fed Drug 763.114S.3 740.1147.5 Fed Sham 708.1108.7 745.183.6 ANOVA for 0 Time S-HIAA Values for All Treatment Groups Source of Variation df MS F Strain 1 2440.4 .00378 Treatments 2 6542.8 .10145 Interaction 2 3402.9 .00527 Error 30 645,157 52 TABLE 7 Amount of 5-HIAA in the Hypothalamus at 60 Min. Post Injection in OM & S Rats OM S Fed Drug 28321156 27921232 Non-Fed Drug 27991265 33871240 Fed Sham 17191164 2049194 ANOVA of 60 Min. Post Injection S-HT Values in All Treatment Groups Source of variation df MS F Strain 1 388176 1.772 Treatments 2 3202928 14.618* Interaction 2 195641 0.893 Error 30 219113 f , 2, 30 .05 = 3.32 53 while the S Fed vs. Non-Fed was only close to the critical value. Wrestling The four drug-injected groups had slopes significantly greater than 0 (P < 0.05) and no line was shown to be non- linear (P < 0.05). DISCUSSION 'Compared to a previous study (Schemmel unpublished data) the average daily food intake for S rats was 93% of ad libitum while 0M intake was 69% of ad libitum. The S rat consumed more diet per gram of body weight than the OH in this study which is consistent with ad libitum feeding. In the Fed test groups the average 20 minute meal intake was 74% and 68% of the two hour meal for the 0M and S rats respectively. This indicated that a considerable amount of food had been consumed for both groups at the time of sample collection. The pattern of weight gain was also different when compared to ad libitum weight gain. While both strains continued to grow after adjusting to the meal feeding sched- ule, the S and OM rats were 86% and 59% of their respective ad libitum weights at 7 1/2 weeks of age. The results can lend qualified support to the overall hypothesis that, when sustained on a high (calorie dense) diet, the S rat will consume less food and have greater serotonergic activity in response to feeding than the 0M rat. First, the S Non-Fed 5-HT accumulation tended to be 'significantly greater than the S Fed (p < 0.10). Second, the OM Non-Fed accumulation was also greater than the 0M Fed but the difference was less than the S Non-Fed vs. Fed 54 55 comparison and was not significant. Also, of equal importance, the S rat ate 0:7 gms less food per day in the 2-hour feeding and 0.9 gms less during the 20-minute meal periods than the 0M rat (p < 0.05). The conclusion that the S rat had a greater serotonergic activity is qualified because the strain comparison in the Non-Fed state indicated that though there was a difference in the S accumulation rate (23.86 ng/g/min) and the OM rate (15494 ng/g/min), it was not significant. The secondary hypothesis is rejected by these results. They suggest that serotonergic activity, as measured by 5-HT production, decreases with food intake. If both hypotheses were true, a greater activity would be expected in the Fed state of the strain that ate less. Since a greater pre-meal serotonergic activity was associated with the strain that consumed less diet, this could indicate that the greater the serotonergic activity before a meal the smaller the meal will be. This conclusion is inconsistent with the findings of Blundel et alt ('76) which through examination of the temporal effect of fenfluramine, suggested that serotonergic activity increased after the onset of feeding. So the results associate a greater serotonergic activity with the animal that consumed less food and suggests that increased serotonergic activity before feeding, instead of in response to feeding, would cause decreased food intake. It may be postulated that since the S rat had a greater difference in 5-HT activity between the Fed vs. Non-Fed state than the OM and ate less than the 0M rat, the S rat 56 may be more responsive to energy or food intake than the 0M rat. These points may explain part of the mechanism which enables the S rat to maintain the same energy intake when fed a high fat--calorie dense--diet. The lack of difference between the Fed Sham vs. Fed Drug groups in each strain (Figures 8 and 9) is inconsistent with the expected drug effects (Morot-Gaundry et al. '74, VanLoon et al. '81) but does not necessarily indicate lack of drug effectiveness. What the statistics imply here is that the variance of the slopes is great enough that they could be parallel. However, the observed slope trends indi- cate that they are different and the Bonferoni comparison of the levels of 5-HT at the 60 minute time point shows that the Fed Drug groups accumulated more 5-HT than the Fed Sham (p < 0.01). This shows that the drug was effective in causing 5-HT to accumulate to levels significantly greater than the Sham state. Comparison of the results in this study with other studies that have examined the relationship of serotonin and appetite is difficult because no study has examined hypo- thalamic serotonergic activity before and after food intake by measuring 5-HT accumulation. Finkelstein et al. ('81) has compared hypothalamic and other brain region 5-HT levels in obese and non-obese Zucker rats. They found approximately 1300 ng 5-HT per gm hypo- thalamus of both types while in this study the average 0 time 5-HT level 1962 1 52 ng per gm in all groups. The differences here may be, in part, because Finkelstein used a 57 flurometric assay method while this study used the LCEC method. Garthwaite et a1" ('79) examined whole brain 5-HT levels in obese (ob/ob) hyperglycemic mice but the results cannot be compared to this study since the whole brain was assayed and a flurometric method for assay was used. In this study, no treatment differences were found when ANOVA was done on base levels (O-time) of 5-HT while a definite trend for a difference was found in the slope comparison of the S Non-Fed vs. Fed groups. This finding supports the earlier assertion that examination of neuro- transmitter activity is more important than neurotransmitter levels for assessing the role of a neuropathway in behavior. In studies that examined the use of LCEC for assay of 5-HT, Reinhard et al. ('80) found 1080 1 80 ng/gm hypothala- mus and Mefford & Barchas ('80) found 841 1.59 ng/gm hypo- thalamus using an LCEC technique very similar to the one used here. These values are almost half the average 0 time amount found in this study, 1962 1 52 ng/gm hypothalamus, but the S.E.M. is very similar. Reports by Anderson ('79), Curzon ('81), Boadle-Biber ('82) and Wurtman & Fernstrom ('76) indicate that a high protein (low carbohydrate) as opposed to a low protein (high carbohydrateQ meal would decrease the availability of Trp for neuronal uptake since the protein would increase the amounts of (naa) that compete for uptake. In this study it may be possible that the diet had this effect since it was relatively high in protein and low in carbohydrate. Also, the study by Li ('82) indicated that as the protein intake 58 of a meal increased 5-HT levels in the whole rat brain would be decreased when they were meaSured 20 minutes after the meal. However, none of the reports reviewed to date has measured 5-HT production before and after a high fat or any other type of meal. Whether the meal caused a decrease in 5-HT production or whether the observed change was due to a change in TH activity cannot be determined from this study. Though 5-HIAA declined as expected in response the pargyline, no differences in decline were detected with the Bonferoni T test. The high variability, combined with the lower stability of 5-HIAA as indicated by rapid decay of the S-HIAA standard, may have caused the variation to be too high to detect differences in 5-HIAA decline. The greater hypothalamus weight in the 0M rat did not appear to contribute extra 5-HT since the OM accumulation- rates tended to be lower. The greater weight is consistent with findings of Stone et al. ('81) that GM rats have greater absolute cerebrum weights. Individual animal variation, the assay technique, and the method for assessing serotonergic activity may have contributed to the large differences in individual sample values at any given time point. Since an individual animal had to be killed for each sample at each time point, the different individual responses to the drug and each animal's variation in enzyme activity would add some variation to the results. The LCEC was very consistent and had a 1-3% error with injection of standards, which is similar to previous 59 studies (Reinhard '80). Twenty to fifty percent sample decay was seen with duplicate injections in the first set of samples which was due to storage and freezing. Also, 30% overall decay was observed to be caused by freezing. When the samples were assayed immediately after processing and antioxidants were added to the homogenate solution 0 to 3% difference was seen in duplicate injections. The decay in the first half of the samples used to calculate the results could have induced a considerable degree of error. W In the preliminary sample collection, the Fed Sham groups in each strain had slopes that were 0 and the Non-Fed Sham groups with 2 values per time point showed that they had a slope of 0. So, to conserve animals and time, the Non-Fed Sham group was omitted from the study. QhQi££_Q£_§Laiifiilnal_flfiihad The Bonferoni T test is the method of choice because it incorporates the variance about each test group slope into the test statistic and more degrees of freedom can be used than if ANOVA was done on the average slope (b1). Both of these aspects increase the power of the Bonferoni test. An ANOVA on individual slopes can only incorporate the variance‘ between slopes derived from one sample at 3 or 4 time points. So, the degrees of freedom are much less than the Bonferoni T and variation is likely to be greater since the slopes are based on one value per time point. SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS Pharmacological and feeding studies have linked sero-' tonin with regulation of food intake in laboratory animals. Whether serotonergic activity is different in two rat strains, the Osborne-Mendell (0M) and S 5B/P1 (S), that respond differently to a high fat diet and whether sero- tonergic activity is increased after feeding are examined here. Hypothalamic 5-HT turnover was measured in CM and S rats by using an MAO inhibitor (pargyline) to assess the 5- HT production rate. 5-HT production can be linked with serotonergic activity since TH (Tryptophan Hydroxylase) can be induced from neuronal activity. Both strains were divided into 3 groups: Fed Drug, Non-Fed Drug, and Fed Sham. All groups were fed a calorie- dense, high fat diet and were adapted to eat their daily food intake in a 2-hour meal at the start of the dark cycle. The Fed groups were given the food cups for 20 minutes of the usual 2-hour meal before being sacrificed, while the Non-Fed groups were not allowed to feed before sacrifice. At the time of sacrifice, the hypothalamus was removed, weighed, and homogenized in 0.1 N perchloric acid with an internal standard. The homogenate supernatant was assayed for 5-HT using LCEC. After injection of drug or vehicle, one rat from each strain in each treatment group was 60 61 sacrificed at 0, 20, 40, and 60 minutes post injection. The rate of 5-HT production, or accumulation, was compared between the groups to determine if there were differences in serotonergic activity between strains and between the Fed and Non-Fed state. Both strains had greater 5-HT accumulation in the Non- Fed state than in the Fed state. Only the S rats had a significantly greater difference (P < 0.10)‘while the 0M difference did not produce a significant trend. Strain comparisons in the treatment groups produced no significant trends through the S slope was greater than the 0M and both strains had very similar slopes in the Fed state. The ability of the S rat to show a significant difference in the Non-Fed vs. Fed comparison while the 0M could not lends support to the overall hypothesis that the S rat will have a greater serotonergic activity than the OH. The Fed vs. Non- Fed comparisons indicate that serotonergic activity is re- duced after feeding and does not support the hypothesis that serotonergic activity would increase. These conclusion are preliminary and indicate that further strain comparisons of 5-HT activity may show some strain differences and further evaluation of the relationship of food intake to serotoner- gic activity is needed to clarify the role of serotonin pathways in appetite regulation. POSSIBLE FOLLOW-UP STUDIES Follow-up studies that extend the design should incor- porate the protein:carbohydrate ratio as a factor. This would show whether the high protein diet actually suppressed Trp production here since high carbohydrate intake has been reported to cause more Trp uptake into the neuron (Curzon '81; Wurtman & Fernstrom, '76). So, in the Fed state, 5-HT accumulation from a high carbohydrate diet would be expected to be greater than from a high fat diet and possibly could show differences in 5-HT turnover between the strains. Also, further trials should measure plasma Trp:naa ratio and hypothalamic Trp levels to examine their effects on 5-HT production. In light of the feeding studies and drug studies that evaluate food choices (Wurtman & Fernstrom, '79; Orthen- Gambill & Kanareck, '82), it would be interesting to examine the choices of fat, carbohydrate and protein between the two strains with and without the administration of a serotoner- gic drug. Also, the temporal pattern of food intake would be another aspect that could be examined with relative ease. To really compare serotonergic activity, one would want to measure the amount of 5-HT released into the synapse. Since reliable methods for this are still being developed, we have to rely on more indirect measures. The present 62 63 method may not be as sensitive as needed to detect differ- ence in serotonergic activity. This method may be more sensitive if micro punches of specific nuclei regions were sampled instead of the whole hypothalamus since it is possi- ble that different nerve bundles could mediate different aspects of feeding and thus have different responses to a given stimuli which together may offset each other. APPENDIX 64 0000. 0000 0.000 00 0.0 0.0 00— —000. 0000 0.—0— 00 0.0 0.0 00— 0000. 0000 0.000 00 0.0 0.—— 000 0000. 0000 0.—00 00 0.0 0.—— 000 0000. 0000 0.00— 00 0.0 0.0— 00— 0000. 0000 0.0—— 00 0.0 0.0— 00— 0000. —000 0.000 00 0.0 0.0 00— 0000. 0000 0.000 00 0.0 —.—— 000 0000. It It 00 0.0 0.0 00— 0000. 0000 0.000 00 0.0 —.—— 000 0000. 0000 0.000 00 0.0 0.0 00— 0000. —0—0 0.000 00 0.0 0.0 00— 0000. 0000 0.000— 00 0.0 0.0 00— 0000. 0000 0.000 00 0.0 0.0 00— 00 00 0000. 0000 0.000 00 0.0 0.0 00— 0000. 0000 —.—00 00 0.0— 0.0— 000 —000. 0000 0.000 00 0.0— —.0— 000 0000. 000— 0.000 00 0.0 0.—— 000 0000. 0000 0.000 00 0.0 0.0 00— —000. 0000 0.000 00 0.0 0.0— 000 0000. 0000 0.000 00 0.0 0.0 00— 0000 00—0 0.—00 00 0.0 0.0 000 0000. 0000 0.000 00 0.0 0.0 00— 0000. 0000 0.000 00 0.0 0.0 —0— —000. It It 00 0.0 0.0 00— 0000. 0000 —.—00 —0 0.0 0.0— 00— 0000. 0000 0.000 00 0.0 0.0 00— —000. 000— 0.000 00 0.0 0.0 00— 00 00 to II to It II II II 0000. 0000 0.000 00 0.0— 0.0— 00— —000. —00— 0.——0 00 0.0 0.0— 000 —000. —00— 0.000 00 0.0 0.—— 000 0000. 0000 0.000 00 0.0 0.0 00— 0000. 0000 0.000 00 0.0 0.0 000 0000. It It 00 0.0 0.0— 00— 0000. 0000 0.000 00 0.0 0.0 00— 0000. 0000 0.000 II 0.0 0.0 —0— —000. It It 00 0.0 0.0— 0—— 0000. 0000 II 00 0.0 0.0 00— 0000. 0000 0.000— —0 0.0 0.0 00— 0000. 0000 0.000 00 0.0 —.0 00— 0000. 0000 0.000 00 0.0 0.0 00— 00 00 0000. 0——0 —.000 00 0.0 0.0— 00— 0—00. 00—0 0.000 00 0.0— 0.0 00— —000. 000— 0.000 00 0.0 0.0 00— 0000. 000— 0.0—0 00 0.0— —.—— 0—0 0—00. It 0.000 00 0.0 0.0 00— —000. II 0.—00 00 0.0 0.0 00— 0000. 000— 0.0—0 00 0.0 0.0 00— 0000. 000— 0.000 00 0.0 0.0 00— 0000. 000— 0.0—0— 00 0.0 —.0 00— —000. 000— 0.000 00 0.0 0.0 00— 0000. 0000 0.000— 00 0.0 0.0 0.00— 0—00. 0000 0.00—— —0 0.0 0.0 00— —000. 0000 0.000— 00 0.0 —.0 0.00— 0000. ——00 0.000— 00 0.0 —.0 00— 0 0 .00 .0: an}... “305 .0005 an. A: an. ‘33 A: .0: .030 an}... “-0.3 a: A: .00 033 .4000000: 0:00 00HII0 000 ~00: an 0 0 .030000 .000 .40000000 00I0 000000 000 «an: an 0 0 .030000 .000 can 00 0090 ad. 00 0000 J12 1.03013 I In 6S . .300 0.0-Ida: o .m.o. .~.~ «..- on «.o. co. ammo. oom~ o.... m. m.. on. ammo. no.“ o..nm n. ... on. u..o. .o.~ ..m.. on o... .a. ~..o. a... ..n.m on n.a .n. m..o. m..~ ..~o~ .. ..o. ca“ 0.00. com. 0.0.0 00 ..o .0. ammo. 0.00 0.~0. .0 .... o0. ammo. ...n ..m.. .m ..o. no. .omo. a... ...n. .m ~.. on. go... II II a. o.. ... o.mo. I. II mm ..o. 0.. 0000. ommm 0.00. 00 0.0 00. 0000. II II no 0.. on. a. o. sous. mmo~ ...mn on o.. so. on... coma ...o« a. «.o 0.. «So. .2... E... n. .6. 3. SS. .3... .6... on a... .N mo.o. .mmu ..m.m mm ..o .n. mono. o~.. II .n 0.. o... o..o. sans II on ~.. on. II .~.~ II .m a.. ... mono. .owm ....m .n ..o on. ammo. ..~m ..n.n .n ... 0.. mm... .33 I on .é o... 23. .9... l «m a... .n. .m... n... ...on on ..c «a. some. .0.» o.oo. m. o... a.. o. o. .ama. o..~ ....n on m... mmw «.oo. .omu ....m mm o.. «a. so... a..~ ...u. mu 9.. no. ..mo. ..o~ a...“ on n... as“ ...o. ..- m.... on m.. .o. o..o. .o.~ n.o.n .n o... n.~ same. «Sam o.m.o. on n.. .~. .ono. m..~ n.amm .. «.o no. m..o. ~..~ ..omo .m ..a on. .m... ...~ o.~mo .n m.. .om ..mo. ...om I. an o.. ... .~.o. .o.~m .I an a.» no. ammo. o..~ 0..~0 on ..o 00. none. .omu ..0.0 mm 0.. mm. ea om name. .no. o.m.n on ~... ..~ ...o. n... ~..~n a. a... ~.~ 0.00. 0... ..000 on 0.0 00. no.0. 0.0. 0.~.. 00 0.. ecu «was. ..~. n..o. mm 0.. «a. ..o. ..e« 0.... .m a... go. m.mo. .~.. o.~m. on ..o on. ..mo. a... ....o .m a.. m.. ammo. 000. 0.0.0 .0 0.0 ~.. mono. menu o..oo. .0 ..o. on. 00.0. upon“ II on «.0 00. no.0. c.0mu II «0 0.. no. .m.o. .«mw o..mn. on a.» on. o~.o. on.“ o..... an a.. o.. o o .u. ..3 .uxua. .uxua. ....a. .0. .0. .a... .0. ..a .ux... Aux-a. ....a. .n. .0. .8... 33.8.... .5... 30.... .2 .3 m m .258 .8. 33.8.... B... «a... .2 .3 N m .258 A... .m.... coo. ...0 cause. cop. s... u no 66 0000. 0..0 ....0 00 0... 0... 000 00.0. 0000 0.0.. .00 0.. ..0. 000 0..0. 000. 0.000 .0 0.. ..0 00. ..00. 0.0. 0.000 .0 0.0 0... .0. .0.0. 0.0. 0.000 00 0.0 0.0 .0. .0.0. 0.0. ..00. 00 0.. ..0 00. 0000. 0.00 ..00. .0 0.. 0..0 0.. ..00. 0.0. ..000 .0 0.0 0.0. 0.. 0000. 00.0 0.0.0. 00 0.0 ..0 .0. 0..0. ...0 0.0.0 00 0.. ... .0. .0.0. .000 0..0.. 00 0.. ... 0.. ..00. II II .0 0.0 ..0. .0. 00 . 00 0..0. .000 0.00. 00 0.. 0.0 0.0 0000. 000. ...00 00 0.. 0.0. .00 0000. 000. 0..00 .0 0.0 0.0 ... .0.0. 00.. ..000 .0 0.0. 0... 000 0.00. .00. 0.000 00 0.0 ..0 00. 00.0 .0.. 0.000 00 0.0 0... 00. 0..0. 0000 0.000 .0 0.0 0..0 00. .000. .00. 0.0.. .0 0.. 0.0. 00. 0000. ..00 0.000 00 0.0 0.0 00. 0.00. 00.0 0.000 00 0.. 0.0 .0. .000. 0..0 0.0.0. 00 0.. ..0 ... .000. 0..0 0.000 00 0.0 ... 00. 0. 0. 0.00. 0000 ..000 00 0.0 0.0. 0.. .000. 00.. 0.000 00 0... 0... 0.0 00.0. 00.. ..000 .0 0.0 0.0 00. .000. .00. 0..00 00 0.0 0.0 00. II II II II II II II .000. 000. ..000 00 0.0. 0.0 0.. 00.0. 0.0. 0..00 00 0.0 ..0 .0. .000. 000. 0.000 00 0.0 ..0 00. ...0. .0.0 II 00 0.0 ..0 0.. 00.0. 0.00 0..00. .0 0.0 ..0 0.. 00 00 .000. 000. 0.0.. 00 0.0 0.0. 0.0 0000. 000. ..000 .0 0.0 .... 00. .0.0. II ..00. 00 0.0 ..0 .0. .000. 00.. 0...0 00 0.0 0.0. 00. 0000. 00.. 0.000 00 0.0 ..0 ... 0000. .0.. ....0 00 0.0 0.0. 00. ..00. ..0. 0.00. .0 0.0. 0.0. .0. 0.00. 00.0 0.00. .0 0.0 0.0. .0. 0.00. 0... ..000 .0 0.0 ..0 00. 00.0. 0.0. ...0. 00 0.0 ..0 00. 0000. 00.0 0.000. 00 0.0 ..0. ... 0.00. 00.. 0..00. .0 0.. 0.0 00. 0 0 .0. ..0 .0.00. .0x0a. ...-0. .0. .0. .0. .0... .0. ..0 .0x0a. .0.00. ....0. .0. .0. .0. .0... ...000000 .0I0 00.0I0 .00 .0.: 00 0 0 .000000 .0.. ...000000 .0I0 ...0I0 00. .0.: .0 0 0 .000000 .00. 0.. 00 0.00 0.. 00 0.00 II000000IuaauI .II000000I0000I . 0 :0 BIBLIOGRAPHY B IBLIOGRAPHY Alexander, G., KOpeloff, M., & Alexander R. 1980. Serotonin and Norepinephrine: Long-Term Decrease in Rate of Synthesis in Brain of Rats Primed with p-Chlorophenyl- alanine. Neurochem Res..5:874-883. Anderson, G. 1979. Control of protein and energy intake: role of plasma amino acids and brain neurotransmitters. Can J. Physiol. Pharmacol 57:1043-57. Ashley, 0., Coscina, D., & Anderson, G. 1979. Selective decrease in protein intake following brain S-HT deple- tion. Life Sci 24:973-984. Blundel, J., Latham, C., and Leshem, M. 1976. Differences between the anorexic actions of amphetamin and fenflur- amin--possible effects on hunger and satiety. J. Pharm. Pharmac. 28:471-477. Burton, M., Cooper, S., and Popplewell, D. 1981. The effect of fenfluramine on the microstructure of feeding and drinking in the rat. Br. J. Pharmac. 72:621-633. Boadle-Biber, M. 1982. Biosynthesis of Serotonin. In: Biology of Serotonergic Transmission, pp. 63-94. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Chee, K., Romsos, D., and Bergen, W. 1981. Effect of dietary fat on protein intake regulation in young obese and lean mice. J. Nutr. 111:668-677. Curzon, G. 1981. Influence of plasma tryptOphan on brain S-HT synthesis and serotonergic activity. In: Advances in Experimental Biology and Medicine. Vol. 133, p. 207. Finkelstein, J., Fischer, W. 1982. Brain serotonergic activ- ity and plasma amino acid levels in genetically obese Zucker rats. Pharmac. Biochem. Behav. 17:939-944. Garattini, S. 1981. Central mechanisms of fenfluramine and related anorectic drugs. Jpn J. Pharmacol. 31 supp. 29P-36P. Garthwaite, T., Kalkhoff, Guansing, A., Hagen, T., and Menaham, L. 1979. Plasma free tryptophan, brain sero- 67 68 tonin and an endocrine profile of the genetically obese hyperglycemic mouse at 4-5 months of age. Endocrinology 105:1178-1182. Grinker, J., Drewnowski, A., Enns, M., and Kissiloff, H. 1980. Effects of d-Amphetamine and fenfluramine on feeding patterns and activity of obese and lean Zucker rats. Pharmac. Biochem. Behav. 12:265—275. Hamon, M., Bourgoin, S., Artaud, F. & Mestikawy, S. 1981. The respective roles of tryptophane uptake and trypto- phane hydroxylase in the regulation of serotonin syn- thesis in the central nervous system. J. Physiol., Paris 77:269-279. Hamond, M., Bourgin, S., Artuad, F., & Nelson, D. 1981. Regulatory properties of neuroidl tryptophan hydroxy- lase. In: Advances in Experimental Medicine & Biology, vol. 133, p. 245. Henry, F. & Ternaux, J. 1981. Regulation of release proces- ses in central serotonergic neurons. J. Physiol., Paris 77:287-301. Holman, B., Angwin, P. & Barchas, J. 1976. Simultaneous determination of inde- and catechlomines in small brain regions in the rat using a week cation exchange resin. Neurosci 1:147-150. Johnson, M. & Crowley, W. 1982. Serotonin turnover in indi- vidual brain nuclei: evaluation of three methods using liquid chromatography with electrochemical detection. Life Sci. 31:589-595. Leibowitz, S. 1980. Neurochemical systems of the hypothala- mus: Control of feeding and drinking behavior and water-electrolyte excretion. In: Handbook of the Hypo- thalamy, ed. by Morgane, P. & Prankseppc J.I pp. 299- 407. Li, R. & Anderson, G. 1982. Self-selected meal composition, circadian rhythms and meal responses in plasma and brain tryptophan and S-hydroxytryptamine in rats. J. Nutr. 112:2001-2010. Mefford, I. 1981. Application of high performance liquid chromatography with electrochemical detection to neur- ochemical analysis: measurement of catechdamines, serotonin and metabolites in rat brain. J. Neurosci. Methods 3:207-224. 69 Mefford, I. & Barchas, J. 1980. Determination of tryptophan and metabolites in rat brain and pineal tissues by reversed-phase high performance liquid chromatography with electrochemical detection. J.‘ Chromatography 181:187-193. Mickelsen, 0., Takahashi, S., & Craig, C. 1955. Experimental Obesity. I. Production of obesity in rats by feeding high fat diets. J. Nutr. 57:541. Morot-Gaundry, Y., Hamon, M., Bourgoin, S., ‘Ley, J., & Glowinski, J. 1974. Estimation of the rate of 5-HT syn- thesis in the mouse brain by various methods. Nauyn- Schmiedeberg's Arch. Pharmacol. 282:223-238. Neckers, L. 1982. Serotonin turnover and regulation. In: biology of Serotonergic Transmission. Ed. N. Osborne, pp. 139-158. Orthen-Gambill, N. & Kanareck, R. 1982. Differential effects of amphetamine and fenfluramine on dietary self-selec- tion in rats. Pharmac. Biochem. Behav. 16:303-309. Peters, J. & Harper, A. 1981. Protein and energy consump- tion, plasma amino acid ratios, and brain neurotrans- mitter concentration. Physiol. Behav. 27:287-298. Reinhard, J., Moskowitz, M., Sued, A., & Fernstrom, J. 1980. A simple, sensitive and reliable assay for serotonin and 5-HIAA in brain tissue using liquid chromatography with electrochemical detection. Life Sci. 27:905-911. Romsos, D., Chee, K., & Bergen, W. 1982. Protein intake reg- ulation in adult obese (ob/ob) and lean mice: effects of nonprotein energy source and of supplemental trypto- phan. J. Nutr. 112:505-513. Samanin, R., Mennini, T. & Garattini, S. 1980. Evidence that it is possible tocause anorexia by increasing release and/or directly stimulating postsynaptic serotonin receptors in the brain. Prog. Neuro-PsychOpharmacol. 4:363-369. Schemmel, R., Hu, D., Mickelsen, 0., and Romsos, D. 1982. Dietary obesity in rats: Influence on carbohydrate metabolism. J. Nutr. 112:223-230. Schemmel, R., Mickelsen, 0., & Motawi, K. 1972. Conversion of dietary to body energy in rats as affected by strain, sex and ration. J. Nutr. 102:1187-1198. 7O Schemmel, R. & Mickelsen, O. 1973. Influence of diet, strain, age and sex on fat depot mass and body composi- tion of the nutritionally obese rat. Proceeding of the IV International Meeting of Endocrinology. Ed. J. Vague and J. Boyer. Schemmel, R., Mickelsen, 0., & Gill, J. 1970. Dietary obesity in rats: Body weight and body fat accretion in seven strains of rats. J. Nutr. 100:1041-1048. Stone, M., Harris, G., Czajka-Narins, D. & Schemmel, R. 1981. Cerebellar and cerebral growth in dietary obesity resistant and susceptible rats. Nutrition Reports International 23:597-607. VanLoon, G., Shum, A. & Sole, M. 1981. Decreased brain serotonin turnover after short term (two hour) adrenal- ectomy in rats: A comparison of four turnover methods. Endocrinology 108:1392-1402. VanWijk, M. & Korf, J. 1981. Postmortem changes of S-Hydrox- ytryptomine and S-Hydroxyindoleacetic acid in mouse brain and their prevention by pargyline and microwave irradiation. Neurochem. Research 6:425-429. Warsh, J., Chiv, A., Li, P. & Godse, D. 1980. comparison of liquid chromatography-electrochemical and gas chromatog- raphy-mass spectrometry methods for brain dopamine and serotonin. J. of Chromatography 183:483-486. Waldbillig, R., Bartness, T., & Stanley, B. 1981. Increased food intake, body weight, and adiposity in rats after reginal neurochemical depletion of serotonin. J. Comp. Physiol. Psycol. 95:391-405. Woodger, T., Sirek, A. & Anderson, G. 1979. Diabetes, dietary tryptophan and protein intake regulation in weanling rats. Am. J. Physiol. 236:R307-R311. Wurtman, R. & Fernstrom, J. 1976. Control of brain neuro- transmitter synthesis by precursor availability and nutritional state. Biochem. Pharmacol. 25:1691-1696. Wurtman, J. & Wurtman, R. 1979. Drugs that enhance central serotoninergic transmission diminish elective carbohy- drate consumption by rats. Life Sci. 24:895-904. Wurtman, J. & Wurtman, R. 1979. Fenfluramine and fluoxetine spare protein consumption while suppressing caloric intake in rats. Science 198:1178-1180.