ACTH1-39 but not naltrexone produces biphasic effects on locomotor activity

Effects of peptides on animal and human behavior: a review of studies published in the first twenty years of the journal Peptides

This review catalogs effects of peptides on various aspects of animal and human behavior as published in the journal Peptides in its first twenty years. Topics covered include: activity levels, addiction behavior, ingestive behaviors, learning and memory-based behaviors, nociceptive behaviors, social and sexual behavior, and stereotyped and other behaviors. There are separate tables for these behaviors and a short introduction for each section.

Naloxone reduces social locomotor activity in rats

Naloxone, a nonspecific opioid antagonist, has been found to decrease the activity and social behavior of rats tested in pairs but the effects on individual locomotor activity have been equivocal. In the present study, groups of male Long-Evans hooded rats received naloxone (1 or 4 mg/kg, IP) or vehicle alone (isotonic saline) 30 min prior to testing sessions. Individual locomotor activity was measured in two activity boxes (41-cm3) equipped with two infrared photobeams using daily 30-min testing sessions for 5 consecutive days. Following a 1-week washout period (no testing), activity and social attraction (paired distance and contact) were examined in pairs of rats from each group using daily 15-min testing sessions for 4 consecutive days. Locomotor activity and its habituation were not significantly affected by naloxone in rats tested individually. However, both doses of naloxone significantly reduced paired locomotor activity compared to the control group. Measures of social attraction were not significantly affected by naloxone. The present findings suggest that naloxone does not produce nonspecific depressant effects on activity but rather may antagonize opioid release in situational contexts of high arousal (e.g., social activity) with consequent reduction of activity.

Food-restriction interacts with vasopressin modulation of activity

The effects of peripheral injection of various doses of lysine-vasopressin (LVP), administered 30 min before a 5-min session in a hole-board apparatus, were compared as a function of food restriction. Comparison of performance for various indices of general activity clearly showed that the food-restricted rats were more active and exhibited less photophobia than normally fed ones. The differences between the two groups were maintained in a second session 24 hours later. There was no sign of behavioral habituation to the apparatus among restricted animals. Different doses (0.2, 1, 2 micrograms of LVP) affected food-restricted animals differently from the rats fed ad lib. Only the highest dose reduced activity in both groups. A posttest injection of the smallest dose (0.2 micrograms) had an opposite effect on the activity in the hole-board, measured 24 hours after the injection. A second experiment showed that plasma and adrenal corticosterone were higher in deprived rats. The administration of 0.2 micrograms of LVP was followed by an increase in corticosterone. In food-restricted rats this increase was bigger and was still observed 24 hours after the injection. There is an interaction between feeding conditions and LVP injections which affects both the internal hormonal state and spontaneous reactivity to environment. These findings are of relevance to the effect of vasopressin on behavior.

Central nervous system effects of peptides, 1980-1985: a cross-listing of peptides and their central actions from the first six years of the journal Peptides

A tabular synopsis is presented for articles concerned with the effects of peptides on the central nervous system that appeared in the journal Peptides from 1980-1985. A table arranged alphabetically by peptide and one arranged by effects, both listing routes of injection, species, direction of change, and qualifying notes, provides easy cross-referencing of peptides and their effects. Over 80 peptides and over 135 effects are listed. The list of peptides includes, but is not limited to: ACTH, angiotensin, bombesin, bradykinin, calcitonin, casomorphin, CCK, ceruletide, CGRP, CRF, dermorphin, DSIP, dynorphin, endorphins, enkephalins, GRF, gastrin, LHRH, litorin, metkephamid, MIF-l, motilin, MSH, NPY, NT, oxytocin, ranatensin, sauvagine, substances P and K, somatostatin, TRH, VIP, vasopressin, and vasotocin. The list of effects includes, but is not limited to: aggression, alcohol, analgesia, attention, avoidance, behavior, cardiovascular regulation, catalepsy, conditioned behavior, convulsions, dopamine binding and metabolism, discrimination, drinking, EEG, exploration, feeding, fever, gastric secretion, GI motility, grooming, learning, locomotor behavior, mating, memory, neuronal activity, open field, operant behavior, rearing, respiration, satiety, scratching, seizure, sleep, stereotypy, temperature, thermoregulation and tolerance.

Administered peptides inhibit the degradation of endogenous peptides. The dilemma of distinguishing direct from indirect effects

Virtually all peptides are biologically active following central administration as a consequence of both direct and indirect cellular actions. Direct effects are mainly interactions with specific membrane receptors but may include unions with other components of the receptor/effector complex. Significant indirect biological effects of exogenous peptides, including apparent secretagogue effects on endogenous peptides largely overlooked in practice, result from extensive competition with endogenous peptides for degradative enzymes (peptidases). A consequence of this competition is enhancement of tonic or intermittent activity of endogenous peptides. The pharmacological profile of any peptide reflects or includes, therefore, the spectrum of endogenous peptides that is protected from peptidase action. It is likely that certain pharmacologically active peptides, including a large number of di-, tri- and oligo-peptides, elicit responses mainly or exclusively by competing for peptidases. Therefore, reliable estimates of the relative contributions of direct and indirect actions of exogenous peptides may be difficult, if not impossible, to obtain.