Interaction between morphine and reinforcing lateral hypothalamic stimulation

Differential responding for brain stimulation reward and sucrose in high-alcohol-drinking (HAD) and low-alcohol-drinking (LAD) rats

BACKGROUND

This study examined the associations among selective breeding for alcohol preference, intake of sweet solutions, and responding for brain stimulation reward (BSR), a nonoral reinforcer, in alcohol-preferring high-alcohol-drinking (HAD)-1 and nonpreferring low-alcohol-drinking (LAD)-1 rats.

METHODS

Adult male HAD-1 and LAD-1 rats were trained to lever press for medial forebrain bundle stimulation. Current intensity was varied in separate sessions to generate a rate/intensity function. To further examine BSR responding, the animals responded for stimulation at 100 Hz and at a fixed current intensity on an FR1 schedule. In subsequent sessions, the schedule was increased to FR6 and then to FR12. To examine responding for the sucrose solution, we trained a separate group of HAD-1/LAD-1 rats to bar press for sucrose on an FR1 schedule. Similar to the BSR experiment, in following sessions, the schedule was increased to an FR6 and then to an FR12 schedule.

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed between the two rat lines across a range of current intensities. As the reinforcement schedule increased, HAD-1 rats exhibited a dramatic decrease in BSR responding, whereas the LAD-1 rats displayed a more protracted reduction. In contrast to BSR, marked elevations in responding were observed for sucrose as the schedule increased. However, in HAD-1 rats, response rates were similar on the FR6 and FR12 schedules, whereas LAD-1 rats showed a reduction in response rates from the FR6 to FR12 schedule. Furthermore, HAD-1 rats exhibited significantly more responses compared with LAD-1 rats across the three reinforcement schedules. An analysis of the response profile for the three reinforcement schedules suggested that few if any postreinforcement pauses were exhibited when the reinforcer was BSR compared with sucrose in both lines.

CONCLUSION

Medial forebrain bundle BSR is a powerful reinforcer in both HAD-1 and LAD-1 lines. However, BSR responding was not associated with selective breeding for alcohol preference. In contrast, selective breeding for alcohol preference was associated with sucrose consumption, especially as the amount of work increased. The lack of correspondence between BSR and sweet taste rewards in HAD-1 and LAD-1 lines may suggest important differences yet an overlapping brain reward mechanism in the control of motivated behaviors in these selected lines.

Discriminating between reward and performance: a critical review of intracranial self-stimulation methodology

Despite numerous pharmacological investigations of intracranial self-stimulation (ICSS), the substrates of this behavior have yet to be completely understood. In view of the likelihood that inadequate methodology has hindered the quest for these substrates, the present review was undertaken. Criteria for ICSS methodology should include not only the ability to discriminate reward from gross performance deficit, but also adequate capacity (ability to generate experimental data at a reasonable rate). For numerous reasons, bar-pressing on a continuous reinforcement schedule fails the first criterion despite its ease and rapidity. The use of partial reinforcement schedules may alleviate some of these shortcomings. Analysis of drug-induced response decrement patterns can discriminate gross motoric incapacity from other variables, although the question of subtle response maintenance deficits remains to be answered. Measurements of response rates using alternative operants do not differentiate reward and performance adequately. More promising, "rate-free" measures using locomotion as an operant include the two-platform method of Valenstein and the "locus of rise" method. Comparison of drug effects on ICSS with those on alternate tasks are fraught with pitfalls including the problems of assuring equivalent rates and patterns of responding. The use of differential electrode placements is ideally suited for neurochemically well-characterized drugs, particularly if "double dissociations" can be established during studies of multiple placements. Presentation of different current intensities or frequencies permits the compilation of rate-intensity functions, and drug-induced shifts in these functions have considerable analytical power. Self-regulation of current intensity constitutes a powerful tool that has yet to realize its full potential in the pharmacological study of ICSS. Extensive studies involving self-regulation of stimulation duration ("shuttlebox" studies) suggest that this method may be highly versatile despite several practical difficulties. It is concluded that at least six of these methods appear to do a reasonable job of excluding gross performance deficit. However, the possible influences of other factors, such as subtle response maintenance deficit, incentive or arousal, remain to be resolved in view of the multifactorial nature of ICSS. Multiple tests for ICSS drug or lesion studies are advocated whenever feasible, as no single test appears capable of resolving all theoretical complexities.