Conditioned taste aversions support drug discrimination learning at low dosages of morphine

Conditioned Taste Avoidance Drug Discrimination Procedure: Assessments and Applications

In the present chapter, we summarize much of the work on the taste avoidance drug discrimination procedure, presenting the logic for its initial introduction and the extension of the procedure in the investigation of the discriminative properties of various drugs. Results from these assessments parallel those from more traditional operant and maze designs in classifying and characterizing the discriminative properties of drug. At the same time, this design reveals a procedure that is sensitive in such assessments by indexing these stimulus properties more rapidly and at lower doses than in the more traditional procedures (in some cases for drugs heretofore resistant in their detection). Importantly, much remains to be learned about the taste avoidance procedure in that the nature of such learning remains unknown and the specific parameters under which it can be established and generalized and its neurochemical and neuroanatomical bases are largely unexplored. The application of drug discrimination learning to human drug abuse continues to be an important consideration for this specific design (as well as that of drug discrimination procedures in general), and recent parallels between drug use and food intake in terms of its regulation by interoceptive stimuli suggests a possible role of the loss of stimulus control in drug escalation and addiction (with possible therapeutic implications via the modulation of these interoceptive cues).

Mouse strain differences in opiate reward learning are explained by differences in anxiety, not reward or learning

Gene-targeting techniques to produce null mutations provide a powerful method for evaluating the contribution of particular candidate genes involved in motivation. The embryonic stem cell lines in which homologous recombination is undertaken are derived from 129 mice, but because of the impoverished performance of 129 mice on a number of behavioral tasks, mice chimeric for the mutation are often bred with a C57BL/6 mouse strain. Thus, an examination of both parental strains is important in the study of the knock-out mice. Although the C57BL/6 behavioral phenotype is well documented, details of the 129 phenotype have not been the focus of study until recently. We investigated opiate motivation in both 129/SvJ and C57BL/6J mouse strains to determine whether, and under what circumstances, the 129/SvJ mouse exhibited motivated behavior toward opiates. 129/SvJ mice required both drug and contextual cues to demonstrate morphine conditioned place preferences on test day, whereas C57BL/6J mice required only contextual cues to express opiate place conditioning. Pentobarbital and diazepam but not saline, cocaine, or naloxone could substitute for morphine on test day in 129/SvJ mice, demonstrating that morphine indeed has rewarding motivational valence in the 129/SvJ mouse strain. This critical, interoceptive cue in 129/SvJ mice on test day may be the anxiolytic properties of the effective drugs. Therefore, some deficits observed in 129 mice and mice harboring this genetic background may be attributed to high levels of anxiety during the retrieval period rather than to sensory, learning, or motivational deficits.

Drug discrimination training with low doses: maintenance of discriminative control

Procedures are reported that maintain control by the drug cue during and after drug discrimination training with lower doses that yield predominantly vehicle-appropriate choices. Twelve pigeons were trained to discriminate chlordiazepoxide (CDP) from saline using two-key (drug vs. vehicle) drug discrimination procedures. Intermixed within each block of 30 sessions were nine sessions of training with 8.0 mg/kg CDP, nine with one of seven lower training doses (4.0, 2.8, 2.0, 1.4, 1.0, 0.7, or 0.5 mg/kg CDP), and 12 with saline. The lower training dose was decreased across blocks. The three lowest training doses (1.0, 0.7, and 0.5 mg/kg CDP) yielded predominantly saline-appropriate choices but had no effect on discrimination of 8.0 mg/kg CDP or saline. Three doses (2.0, 1.4, and 1.0 mg/kg CDP) were retrained, and each yielded percentages of drug-appropriate choices nearly identical to those obtained during previous training. This drug discrimination procedure maintains control by the drug cue during and after training with vehicle-like doses of the training drug and may allow for repeated assessment of effects of low training doses.

Nalorphine as a stimulus in drug discrimination learning: assessment of the role of mu- and kappa-receptor subtypes

Using the conditioned taste aversion baseline of drug discrimination learning, animals were trained to discriminate nalorphine from distilled water. In subsequent generalization tests, the mu-opiate agonist morphine substituted for the nalorphine stimulus in a dose-dependent manner, while the kappa-opiate agonist U50,488H and the mu-opiate antagonists naloxone and naltrexone failed to do so. That the mu-agonist morphine substituted for the nalorphine stimulus while a kappa-agonist and mu-antagonists failed to substitute indicate that the discriminative control that was established with nalorphine in the present study was mu-agonist receptor-mediated. The basis for this selective control by the mu-receptor subtype may be related to the relative salience of receptor activity in opiate-naive animals. The present results suggest that discriminative control by compounds with activity at multiple receptor sites is not uniformly mediated by specific activity at all of those sites. The specific site mediating discriminative control appears to be a function of the specific training drug.