Fig. 5: Strengthening or weakening of LHAglu-VTA synaptic transmission respectively mimics and prevents stress-driven fat intake in a limited access model. | Nature Communications

Fig. 5: Strengthening or weakening of LHAglu-VTA synaptic transmission respectively mimics and prevents stress-driven fat intake in a limited access model.

From: Stress-driven potentiation of lateral hypothalamic synapses onto ventral tegmental area dopamine neurons causes increased consumption of palatable food

Fig. 5

a Opto-evoked AMPAR amplitudes at LHAglu-VTADA synapses are enhanced by Dexamethasone (Dex) infusion (n cells group = 27, KS test, D = 0.37, p = 0.036). Example traces, scale bars: 25 pA, 25 ms. b Experimental timeline and schematic of in vivo local Dex infusion in the VTA. Below: Representative example of cannula placement with infusion site visualized by infusion of fluorescent beads (red). Scale bar: 100 µm. c Fat intake (kcal) overall increases in a 2 h limited fat access model after in vivo dex infusion (averages + SEMs, n animals control = 6, n animals Dex = 5, RM Two-way ANOVA. Main effect Dex, F(1,9) = 7.03, p = 0.03). d Timeline and schematic of in vivo optogenetic reduction of stress-potentiated LHAglu-VTADA synapses. e Representative example images of coronal sections. Left: example of LHA CoChR (green) virus expression. Right: example of bilateral in vivo optogenetic fiber placement above the VTA with TH staining (purple) for dopamine neurons. Scale bar: 100 µm. Anatomical reference point: f fornix. f Cumulative probability of LHAglu-VTA opto-evoked AMPAR amplitudes for control, stress and stress + in vivo opto 1 Hz 30 min stimulation conditions. In vivo 1 Hz 30 min stimulation significantly decreases the AMPA amplitude, when comparing stress with and without stimulation (n cells control = 26, n cells stress = 22, n cells stress+1 Hz = 24, KS-test, D = 0.61, p = 0.0002). Scale bars: 25 pA, 25 ms. g Total fat intake (kcal) on PSD1 and PSD2 in 2 h access increased after stress in YFP control conditions, but not in CoChR conditions (averages + SEMs, n animals YFP-control = 30, n animals YFP-stress = 30, n animals CoChR-control = 21, n animals CoChR-stress = 19. RM Two-way ANOVA. Interaction stress X Virus type F(1,96) = 7.16, p = 0.009; YFP-Control vs YFP-Stress F(1,58) = 12.78, p = 0.001; CoChR-Control vs CoChR-Stress F(1,38) = 0.28, p = 0.60). All statistical tests were performed two-sided. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.

Back to article page