Sensing Sweets Without Taste

Mice that cannot taste sugar can still tell when sugar is in what they ingest. Cynthia Graber reports.

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Podcast Transcript: Brains can register a food’s caloric value independent of our taste buds, say scientists from Duke University and from Portugal. First the scientists engineered mice without taste receptors for sweets. They compared the so-called sweet-blind mice to normal mice. Both were offered plain water or water with sucrose. And within about ten minutes, even the sweet-blind mice preferred the sugar water. The same test was repeated with sucralose, a calorie-free sweetener. The mice that could taste the sweetener preferred, but the mice without the taste receptors never developed a preference for the fake stuff.

Then the researchers looked at the brains of the sweet-blind mice. Sucrose turned on neurons in the brain’s food-reward system. And the brain chemical dopamine was elevated—dopamine is a crucial part of the brain’s reward circuitry. These changes show that the brain’s reward system can detect internal physiological changes even independent of taste—maybe through the digestive system. The work appears in the March 27 issue of the journal Neuron. Scientists are calling this nutrient awareness the brain’s sixth sense for calories. They say teasing out these mechanisms could have implications in understanding and combating obesity.

—Cynthia Graber

60-Second Science is a daily podcast. Subscribe to this Podcast: RSS | iTunes


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


 

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe