Fos expression in mesocorticolimbic areas during heroin place conditioning

NeuroReport

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 63-67

  Honsberger, Michael J M ^a   Leri, Francesco ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GUELPH   (Canada)

Author keywords

Acquisition; Amygdala; Fos; Heroin; Nucleus accumbens; Place preference; Prefrontal cortex

Indexed keywords

DIAMORPHINE; PROTEIN FOS;

ANALYTIC METHOD; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONDITIONING; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOPAMINERGIC SYSTEM; LIMBIC CORTEX; MALE; NONHUMAN; PLACE PREFERENCE; PREFRONTAL CORTEX; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN EXPRESSION; RAT; STATE DEPENDENT LEARNING;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANIMALS; BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; BRAIN CHEMISTRY; CEREBRAL CORTEX; CONDITIONING, OPERANT; HEROIN; LIMBIC SYSTEM; MALE; NARCOTICS; ONCOGENE PROTEINS V-FOS; RATS; RATS, SPRAGUE-DAWLEY; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 40349084063     PISSN: 09594965     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/WNR.0b013e3282f31d82     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Hyman SE, Malenka RC, Nestler EJ. Neural mechanisms of addiction: the role of reward-related learning and memory. Ann Rev Neurosci 2006; 29:565-598.
2. Robinson TE, Berridge KC. Addiction. Ann Rev Psychol 2003; 54:25-53.
3. Bardo MT, Rowlett JK, Harris MJ. Conditioned place preference using opiate and stimulant drugs: a meta-analysis. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 1995; 19:39-51.
4. Everitt BJ, Parkinson JA, Olmstead MC, Arroyo M, Robledo P, Robbins TW. Associative processes in addiction and reward. The role of amygdala-ventral striatal subsystems. Ann NY Acad Sci 1999; 877:412-438.
5. Tzschentke TM, Schmidt WJ. Functional heterogeneity of the rat medial prefrontal cortex: effects of discrete subarea-specific lesions on drug-induced conditioned place preference and behavioural sensitization. Eur J Neurosci 1999; 11:4099-4109.
6. Isaac WL, Nonneman AJ, Neisewander J, Landers T, Bardo MT. Prefrontal cortex lesions differentially disrupt cocaine-reinforced conditioned place preference but not conditioned taste aversion. Behav Neurosci 1989; 103:345-355.
7. See RE, Fuchs RA, Ledford CC, McLaughlin J. Drug addiction, relapse, and the amygdala. Ann NY Acad Sci 2003; 985:294-307.
8. Balleine BW, Killcross S. Parallel incentive processing: an integrated view of amygdala function. Trends Neurosci 2006; 29:272-279.
9. Di Chiara G. Nucleus accumbens shell and core dopamine: differential role in behavior and addiction. Behav Brain Res 2002; 137:75-114.
10. Miller CA, Marshall JF. Altered Fos expression in neural pathways underlying cue-elicited drug seeking in the rat. Eur J Neurosci 2005; 21:1385-1393.
11. Leri F, Rizos Z. Reconditioning of drug-related cues: a potential contributor to relapse after drug reexposure. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 2005; 80:621-630.
12. Paolone G, Conversi D, Caprioli D, Bianco PD, Nencini P, Cabib S, Badiani A. Modulatory effect of environmental context and drug history on heroin-induced psychomotor activity and fos protein expression in the rat brain. Neuropsychopharmacology 2007; Epub ahead of print.
13. Pearce JM, Hall G. A model for Pavlovian learning: variations in the effectiveness of conditioned but not of unconditioned stimuli. Psychol Rev 1980; 87:532-552.
14. Paxinos G, Watson C. The rat brain in stereotaxic coordinates. San Diego: Elsevier Academic Press; 2005.
15. Badiani A, Anagnostaras SG, Robinson TE. The development of sensitization to the psychomotor stimulant effects of amphetamine is enhanced in a novel environment. Psychopharmacology 1995; 117:443-452.
16. Uslaner J, Badiani A, Day HE, Watson SJ, Akil H, Robinson TE. Environmental context modulates the ability of cocaine and amphetamine to induce c-fos mRNA expression in the neocortex, caudate nucleus, and nucleus accumbens. Brain Res 2001; 920:106-116.
17. Kandel ER. The molecular biology of memory storage: a dialogue between genes and synapses. Science 2001; 294:1030-1038.
18. Beninger RJ, Gerdjikov T. The role of signaling molecules in reward-related incentive learning. Neurotox Res 2004; 6:91-104.
19. Randich A, LoLordo VM. Associative and nonassociative theories of the UCS preexposure phenomenon: implications for Pavlovian conditioning. Psychol Bull 1979; 86:523-548.
20. Lubow RE, Rifkin B, Alek M. The context effect: the relationship between stimulus pre-exposure and environmental preexposure determines subsequent learning. J Exp Psychol Animal Behav Proc 1967; 2:38-47.
21. Phillips GD, Setzu E, Vugler A, Hitchcott PK. Immunohistochemical assessment of mesotelencephalic dopamine activity during the acquisition and expression of Pavlovian versus instrumental behaviours. Neuroscience 2003; 117:755-767.
22. Waelti P, Dickinson A, Schultz W. Dopamine responses comply with basic assumptions of formal learning theory. Nature 2001; 412:43-48.
23. Rescorla RA, Wagner AR. A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and non-reinforcement. In: Black AH, Prokasy WF, editors. Classical conditioning II: current research and theory. New York, NY: Appelton Century Crofts; 1972. pp. 64-99.
24. Kaplan GB, Leite-Morris KA, Joshi M, Shoeb MH, Carey RJ. Baclofen inhibits opiate-induced conditioned place preference and associated induction of Fos in cortical and limbic regions. Brain Res 2003; 987:122-125.