Differences in the taste quality of maltose and sucrose in rats: issues involving the generalization of conditioned taste aversions

The present study employed a conditioned taste aversion generalizationparadigm to test the hypothesis that maltose produces tastesensations in the rat which are qualitatively distinguishablefrom sucrose. Since stimulus generalization can occur in boththe quality and intensity domains, an intrachemical (acrossconcentration) generalization gradient was established to aidin the interpretation of the interchemical (across molecules)generalization gradient. Moreover, since the commonly used intaketest is vulnerable to nontaste post-ingestional influences,the present study measured immediate responses to 100 µlstimulus samples, thus increasing our confidence that the behaviorwas under orosensory control. In Experiment 1, naive water deprivedrats were trained in a specially designed gustometer to maintaindrinking-spout contact for intermittent water reinforcement.Following this, rats in the experimental group were given threeexposures to 0.1 M sucrose on separate days, with the firsttwo exposures immediately preceding an injection of LiCl. Acontrol group was treated identically but received distilledwater instead of sucrose. Rats were then tested in the gustometerfor their avoidance of three equimolar concentrations of sucroseand maltose. Rats received ten trials of each stimulus quasi-randomlypresented in two sessions. Results indicated that all sucroseconcentrations were avoided (in experimental group only), butonly the 0.3 M concentration of maltose was avoided. The lowestsucrose concentration was significantly less avoided than thehigher concentrations. Intensity generalization gradients aresuch that intensities weaker than the conditioned stimulus (CS)produce just as much or less of a conditioned response (CR)and intensities stronger than the CS produce just as much ora greater CR than that elicited by the CS itself. Therefore,based on the results of Experimental, it was predicted thatif 0.1 M maltose served as the CS, the order of avoidance shouldbe: 0.3 M sucrose 0.1 M sucrose 0.03 M sucrose 0.3 M maltose 0.1 M maltose 0.03 M maltose, if it were true that maltoseand sucrose produce identical sensations that differ only inintensity. Experiment 2 explicitly tested this prediction usingthe same procedure as Experiment 1 except that 0.1 M maltoseserved as the CS. The observed order of avoidance was 0.3 Mmaltose > 0.1 M maltose > 0.03 M maltose = 0.3 M sucrose= 0.1 M sucrose = 0.03 M sucrose. In both experiments the intrachemicalgeneralization gradient broadened and the interchemical generalizationgradient steepened upon retesting. In conclusion, qualitativedifferences between maltose and sucrose explain the outcomesof these experiments better than differences in the relativeintensity of these sugars at isomolar concentrations.