Intragastric drug self-administration by rats exposed successively to morphine and ethanol

Are astroglial cells involved in morphine tolerance?

Morphine gives rise to a cascade of events in the nervous system affecting, among others, neurotransmitter metabolism. Tolerance develops for various effects shortly after administration of the drug. Also, physical dependence develops and can be demonstrated by precipitation of withdrawal reactions. Biochemical events in nervous tissue have been extensively studied during morphine treatment. This overview will focus upon brain protein metabolism since macromolecular events might be of importance for development of long-term effects, such as tolerance and physical dependence. Both dose- and time-dependent changes in brain protein synthesis and the syntheses of specific proteins have been demonstrated after morphine treatment, although methodological considerations are important. Different experimental models (animal and tissue culture models) are presented. It might be interesting to note that astroglial protein synthesis and the secretion of proteins to the extracellular medium are both changed after morphine treatment, these having been evaluated in astroglial enriched primary cultures and in brain tissue slices. The possibility is suggested that proteins released from astroglial cells participate in the communication with other cells, including via synaptic regions, and that such communication might of significance in modifying the synaptic membranes during morphine intoxication.

Intravenous self-administration of pentobarbital and ethanol in rats

Rats provided with unlimited access to intravenous doses of ethanol (30, 60, 90, 180, and 360 mg/kg/infusion) failed to initiate and maintain lever pressing that resulted in ethanol delivery. When pentobarbital (0.5 mg/kg/infusion) was substituted for ethanol, lever pressing increased. There were three indications of the positive reinforcing effects of pentobarbital: (1) a greater number of lever presses occurred when pentobarbital was response-contingent than when saline was available; (2) a greater number of responses were made on the pentobarbital lever than on a control "activity" lever; and (3) systematic changes in lever pressing were a function of pentobarbital dose (0.125, 0.25, 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 mg/kg/infusion). Sequential substitution of ethanol (30, 90, 360 mg/kg/infusion) for pentobarbital failed to maintain lever pressing. However, access to combinations of ethanol (1, 3, 10, 30, 60 mg/kg/infusion) and a nonreinforcing dose of pentobarbital (0.125 or 0.25 mg/kg/infusion) did maintain lever pressing. As the dose of ethanol increased, the daily number of infusions first increased then decreased. Following a history of self-administration of ethanol-pentobarbital combinations, a retest of ethanol alone (10 or 30 mg/kg/infusions) followed by pentobarbital alone (0.125 or 0.25 mg/kg/infusion) failed to maintain lever pressing.