Abolition and reversel of strain differences in behavioral responses to drugs of abuse after a brief experience

Science

Volumn 289, Issue 5478, 2000, Pages 463-465

  Cabib, Simona ^a   Orsini, Cristina ^a   Le Moal, Michel ^b   Piazza, Pier Vincenzo ^b  

^a SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

^b INSERM   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AMPHETAMINE; CENTRAL STIMULANT AGENT;

ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; ARTICLE; DRUG ABUSE; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; GENETIC LINKAGE; MOUSE; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STARVATION; STRAIN DIFFERENCE; ADDICTION; ANIMAL; C57BL MOUSE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONDITIONING; DBA MOUSE; DRUG EFFECT; FOOD DEPRIVATION; GENE; MALE; MOTOR ACTIVITY; PHENOTYPE; SPECIES DIFFERENCE; WEIGHT REDUCTION;

AMPHETAMINE; ANIMALS; BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM STIMULANTS; CONDITIONING (PSYCHOLOGY); FOOD DEPRIVATION; GENES; MALE; MICE; MICE, INBRED C57BL; MICE, INBRED DBA; MOTOR ACTIVITY; PHENOTYPE; SPECIES SPECIFICITY; SUBSTANCE-RELATED DISORDERS; WEIGHT LOSS;

EID: 0034697897     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.289.5478.463     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. S. Puglisi-Allegra and S. Cabib, Prog. Neurobiol. 51, 637 (1997); C. Rossi-Amaud and M. Ammassari- Teule, Exp. Brain. Res. 123, 36 (1998); S. J. Royle, F. C. Collins, H. T. Rupniak, J. C. Barnes, R. Anderson, Brain Res. 816, 337 (1999).
2. S. Puglisi-Allegra and S. Cabib, Prog. Neurobiol. 51, 637 (1997); C. Rossi-Amaud and M. Ammassari-Teule, Exp. Brain. Res. 123, 36 (1998); S. J. Royle, F. C. Collins, H. T. Rupniak, J. C. Barnes, R. Anderson, Brain Res. 816, 337 (1999).
3. S. Puglisi-Allegra and S. Cabib, Prog. Neurobiol. 51, 637 (1997); C. Rossi-Amaud and M. Ammassari- Teule, Exp. Brain. Res. 123, 36 (1998); S. J. Royle, F. C. Collins, H. T. Rupniak, J. C. Barnes, R. Anderson, Brain Res. 816, 337 (1999).
4. J. C. Crabbe, T. J. Phillips, K. J. Buck, C. L. Cunningham, J. K. Belknap, Trends Neurosci. 22, 173 (1999); J. R. Hofstetter, B. Possidente, A. R. Mayeda, Chronobiol. Int. 16, 269 (1999); J. M. Wehner et al., Nature Genet. 17, 331 (1997).
5. J. C. Crabbe, T. J. Phillips, K. J. Buck, C. L. Cunningham, J. K. Belknap, Trends Neurosci. 22, 173 (1999); J. R. Hofstetter, B. Possidente, A. R. Mayeda, Chronobiol. Int. 16, 269 (1999); J. M. Wehner et al., Nature Genet. 17, 331 (1997).
6. J. C. Crabbe, T. J. Phillips, K. J. Buck, C. L. Cunningham, J. K. Belknap, Trends Neurosci. 22, 173 (1999); J. R. Hofstetter, B. Possidente, A. R. Mayeda, Chronobiol. Int. 16, 269 (1999); J. M. Wehner et al., Nature Genet. 17, 331 (1997).
7. P. M. Steele, J. F. Medina, W. L. Nores, M. D. Mauk, Cell 79, 958 (1998); J. N. Crawley, Brain. Res. 835, 18 (1999).
8. P. M. Steele, J. F. Medina, W. L. Nores, M. D. Mauk, Cell 79, 958 (1998); J. N. Crawley, Brain. Res. 835, 18 (1999).
9. J. C. Crabbe, D. Wahlsten, B. C. Dudek, Science 284, 1670 (1999).
10. M. B. van den Bree, E. O. Johnson, M. C. Neale, R. W. Pickens, Drug Alcohol Depend. 52, 231 (1998); M. B. van den Bree, D. S. Svikis, R. W. Pickens, Drug Alcohol Depend. 49, 177 (1998); J. C. Crabbe, J. K. Belknap, K. J. Buck, Science 264, 1715 (1994).
11. M. B. van den Bree, E. O. Johnson, M. C. Neale, R. W. Pickens, Drug Alcohol Depend. 52, 231 (1998); M. B. van den Bree, D. S. Svikis, R. W. Pickens, Drug Alcohol Depend. 49, 177 (1998); J. C. Crabbe, J. K. Belknap, K. J. Buck, Science 264, 1715 (1994).
12. M. B. van den Bree, E. O. Johnson, M. C. Neale, R. W. Pickens, Drug Alcohol Depend. 52, 231 (1998); M. B. van den Bree, D. S. Svikis, R. W. Pickens, Drug Alcohol Depend. 49, 177 (1998); J. C. Crabbe, J. K. Belknap, K. J. Buck, Science 264, 1715 (1994).
13. E. D. Saghal, Behavioral Neuroscience: A Practical Approach (IRL Press, Oxford Univ. Press, New York, 1993), vol. 1, chaps. 2, 3, 7, 8, 10, and 12; M. A. Nader, T. A. Tatham, J. E. Barrett, Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 654, 368 (1992); J. E. Barrett, NIDA Res. Monogr. 124, 161 (1992).
14. E. D. Saghal, Behavioral Neuroscience: A Practical Approach (IRL Press, Oxford Univ. Press, New York, 1993), vol. 1, chaps. 2, 3, 7, 8, 10, and 12; M. A. Nader, T. A. Tatham, J. E. Barrett, Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 654, 368 (1992); J. E. Barrett, NIDA Res. Monogr. 124, 161 (1992).
15. E. D. Saghal, Behavioral Neuroscience: A Practical Approach (IRL Press, Oxford Univ. Press, New York, 1993), vol. 1, chaps. 2, 3, 7, 8, 10, and 12; M. A. Nader, T. A. Tatham, J. E. Barrett, Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 654, 368 (1992); J. E. Barrett, NIDA Res. Monogr. 124, 161 (1992).
16. P. V. Piazza and M. Le Moal, Trends Pharmacol. 19, 67 (1998); Amu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 36, 359 (1996).
17. P. V. Piazza and M. Le Moal, Trends Pharmacol. 19, 67 (1998); Amu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 36, 359 (1996).
18. Male mice of the inbred C57BL/6Jlco and DBA/2Jlco strains were purchased at 6 weeks of age and housed in standard breeding cage (four per cage) with food and water ad libitum on a cycle that was 12 hours of dark and 12 hours of light (lights on between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m.). Experiments started when animals reached 8 weeks of age and were conducted during the second half of the light phase.
19. P. V. Piazza, J. M. Deminiere, M. Le Moal, H. Simon, Science 245, 1511 (1989); T. E. Robinson and K. C. Berridge, Brain Res. Rev. 18, 247 (1993); W. A. Carlezon Jr. et al., Science 277, 812 (1997).
20. P. V. Piazza, J. M. Deminiere, M. Le Moal, H. Simon, Science 245, 1511 (1989); T. E. Robinson and K. C. Berridge, Brain Res. Rev. 18, 247 (1993); W. A. Carlezon Jr. et al., Science 277, 812 (1997).
21. P. V. Piazza, J. M. Deminiere, M. Le Moal, H. Simon, Science 245, 1511 (1989); T. E. Robinson and K. C. Berridge, Brain Res. Rev. 18, 247 (1993); W. A. Carlezon Jr. et al., Science 277, 812 (1997).
22. Locomotor activity was measured in eight identical toggle floor boxes; each was divided into two 20- by 10-cm compartments. The number of crossings from one compartment to the other was recorded by means of a microswitch connected to the tilting floor of the box. The apparatus was placed inside a sound-attenuated cubicle, where temperature was kept constant, and a 30-W lamp was the only source of illumination. Mice were first allowed to become habituated to the test cage for 1 hour. They were then placed again in their home cage and left undisturbed for an additional hour. Subsequently, mice were injected with amphetamine or vehicle (10 ml/kg, intraperitoneally) and immediately placed in the testing cages for an additional hour.
23. M. D. Schechter and D. J. Calcagnetti, Neurosci. Bio. Behav. Rev. 17, 21 (1993); W. A. Carlezon Jr. et al., Science 282, 2272 (1998); W. J. McBride, J. M. Murphy, S. Ikemoto, Behav. Brain. Res. 101, 129 (1999).
24. M. D. Schechter and D. J. Calcagnetti, Neurosci. Bio. Behav. Rev. 17, 21 (1993); W. A. Carlezon Jr. et al., Science 282, 2272 (1998); W. J. McBride, J. M. Murphy, S. Ikemoto, Behav. Brain. Res. 101, 129 (1999).
25. M. D. Schechter and D. J. Calcagnetti, Neurosci. Bio. Behav. Rev. 17, 21 (1993); W. A. Carlezon Jr. et al., Science 282, 2272 (1998); W. J. McBride, J. M. Murphy, S. Ikemoto, Behav. Brain. Res. 101, 129 (1999).
26. Place conditioning was performed in boxes formed by two gray Plexiglas chambers (15 X 15 X 20 cm) connected by an alley (15 X 5 X 20 cm) that had two openings (4 X 4 cm), one per chamber, which could be dosed by sliding doors. In each chamber two triangular parallalepipeds (5 X 5 X 20 cm) made of black Plexiglas and arranged to form different patterns (always covering the same surface of the chamber) were used as conditioned stimuli. On day 1 (pretest), one mouse was introduced in the central alley of each place conditioning box. Thirty seconds later, the sliding doors were removed and the mouse was left to explore the entire box for 15 min. During the following 8 days (conditioning), mice were confined daily (for 40 min) alternately in one of the two chambers. In each experimental group, half of the animals were first exposed to one of the patterns and half to the other pattern. For each animal, over the 8 days, one of the patterns was consistently paired with saline and the other one with amphetamine. Mice received injections immediately before being placed in the chambers. Testing was conducted on day 10. Animals did not receive any injection and, as in the pretest, were placed in the central alley of the experimental boxes for 30 s and then left to explore the boxes for 15 min. Test sessions were videotaped and later on an experienced observer, unaware of the treatment conditions, recorded the time spent (seconds) in the different compartments. Place-preference scores were calculated as: [(the amount of time spent in the drug-paired compartment)/(amount of time spent in both compartments)] x 100. These place conditioning procedures have been described in detail and validated elsewhere (16).
27. S. Cabib, E. Kempf, C. Schleef, A. Oliverio, S. Puglisi-Altegra, Brain Res. 441, 153 (1988); S. Cabib et al., Brain Res. 729, 10 (1996); S. Cabib et al., Neurosci. 84, 193 (1998).
28. S. Cabib, E. Kempf, C. Schleef, A. Oliverio, S. Puglisi- Altegra, Brain Res. 441, 153 (1988); S. Cabib et al., Brain Res. 729, 10 (1996); S. Cabib et al., Neurosci. 84, 193 (1998).
29. S. Cabib, E. Kempf, C. Schleef, A. Oliverio, S. Puglisi- Altegra, Brain Res. 441, 153 (1988); S. Cabib et al., Brain Res. 729, 10 (1996); S. Cabib et al., Neurosci. 84, 193 (1998).
30. R. Gerlai, Trends Neurosci. 19, 177 (1996).
31. D. C. Fowels, Annu. Rev. Psychol. 43, 303 (1992); S. Cabib and S. Puglisi-Allegra, Psychopharmacology 128, 331 (1996).
32. D. C. Fowels, Annu. Rev. Psychol. 43, 303 (1992); S. Cabib and S. Puglisi-Allegra, Psychopharmacology 128, 331 (1996).
33. S. Cabib et al., Psychopharmacology 125, 92 (1996).
34. This work was supported by INSERM, CNR, Ministero dell'Università e della Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica (MURST), and University of Bordeaux II. The authors wish to thank M. Marinelli and C. Brandon for helpful comments.