Effects of morphine on acquisition and maintenance of ethanol and water intake patterns in rats

Behavioral sensitization and voluntary ethanol drinking in alcohol-preferring AA rats exposed to different regimens of morphine treatment

The purpose of the study was to investigate the effects of three different regimens of morphine treatment on subsequent voluntary ethanol drinking in alcohol-preferring AA (Alko Alcohol) rats. The rats were given morphine subcutaneously either intermittently on alternating days (15 x 10 mg/kg or 5 x 5-20 mg/kg in escalating doses) or subchronically on four consecutive days (3-20 mg/kg/d). Horizontal locomotor activity was monitored after challenges with additional morphine injections (3 mg/kg) ten days and six weeks after termination of the pretreatment to test if behavioral sensitization was induced by repeated morphine administration. Both intermittent pretreatments induced sensitized locomotor response after the first challenge, whereas subchronic injections did not. After the challenge the rats were given a free choice between tap water and 10% (v/v) ethanol solution for four weeks. The rats pretreated and challenged with morphine did not differ significantly in the acquisition of ethanol drinking from the saline-treated controls. In contrast, ethanol drinking was impaired during the first week of ethanol access in the saline-treated rats given a single morphine injection. The second morphine challenge given after the ethanol-drinking phase did not reveal sensitization in any of the groups. The results suggest that pattern of morphine administration rather than the dose or number of exposures to the drug is the most important factor in induction of behavioral sensitization, and that exposure to ethanol may interfere with this process. They also support earlier findings showing that acute morphine may suppress voluntary ethanol drinking, but failed to provide clear evidence for behavioral sensitization to morphine contributing to predilection towards ethanol in AA rats.

Differential regulation of hippocampal progenitor proliferation by opioid receptor antagonists in running and non-running spontaneously hypertensive rats

Voluntary running in mice and forced treadmill running in rats have been shown to increase the amount of proliferating cells in the hippocampus. Little is known as yet about the mechanisms involved in these processes. It is well known that the endogenous opioid system is affected during running and other forms of physical exercise. In this study, we evaluated the involvement of the endogenous opioids in the regulation of hippocampal proliferation in non-running and voluntary running rats. Nine days of wheel running was compared with non-running in spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR), a rat strain known to run voluntarily. On the last 2 days of the experimental period all rats received two daily injections of the opioid receptor antagonists naltrexone or naltrindole together with injections of bromodeoxyuridine to label dividing cells. Brain sections from the running rats showed approximately a five-fold increase in newly generated cells in the hippocampus, and this increase was partly reduced by naltrexone but not by naltrindole. By contrast, both naltrexone and naltrindole increased hippocampal proliferation in non-running rats. In non-running rats the administration of naltrexone decreased corticosterone levels and adrenal gland weights, whereas no significant effects on these parameters could be detected for naltrindole. However, adrenal gland weights were increased in naltrexone- but not in naltrindole-administered running rats. In addition, in voluntary running rats there was a three-fold increase in the hippocampal levels of Met-enkephalin-Arg-Phe compared with non-runners, indicating an increase in opioid activity in the hippocampus during running. These data suggest an involvement of endogenous opioids in the regulation of hippocampal proliferation in non-running rats, probably through hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis modulation. During voluntary running in SHR naltrexone altered hippocampal proliferation via as yet unknown mechanisms.

Low dose of morphine and the consumption of a sweetened ethanol solution: differential effects on acquisition and maintenance

The influence of a low dose of morphine was investigated on the acquisition and maintenance of consumption of a sweetened ethanol solution with water as the alternative in a two-bottle choice procedure. During acquisition in Experiment 1, morphine failed to significantly increase the consumption of a sweetened ethanol solution compared to either a postinjection period in the same animals or a no-treatment control group. Although morphine significantly increased sweetened ethanol consumption when compared to a saline control group, this appears to be due to a stress response to the injections, which suppressed ethanol consumption in the saline animals. During maintenance in Experiment 2, morphine significantly increased consumption of sweetened ethanol in all groups compared to consumption following saline control injections. There was no difference in this effect among the three groups, suggesting that prior history with morphine was not a factor. In addition, rats that were exposed to morphine during both experiments drank significantly more sweetened ethanol following injections in Experiment 2 than in Experiment 1. This suggests that morphine's potentiation of ethanol consumption is due to its interaction with endogenous opioid receptors that modulate the reward value of ethanol rather than more general mechanisms affecting satiety or taste. The results of these experiments provide support for both the Deficit and Surfeit Hypotheses of ethanol consumption, both of which suggest that endogenous opioid receptors are responsible, in part, for ethanol's reinforcing properties.

Morphine enhances selection of both sucrose and ethanol in a two-bottle test

The influence of a low dose of morphine on the self-selection of alcohol and sucrose solutions is investigated. When given a choice between sucrose sweetened ethanol and plain water, rats show a significant preference for the sweetened ethanol. However, when given a choice between sweetened ethanol and sweetened water, rats increase consumption of sweetened water. These results suggest that the low-dose morphine enhancement of sweetened alcohol solutions is mediated by the reinforcing properties of sucrose not ethanol. However, when rats receive small doses of morphine and a choice between unsweetened ethanol and water, the rats increase consumption of ethanol. Therefore, a low dose of morphine enhances the self-selection of both sucrose and ethanol solutions. This provides additional confirmation that opioids may enhance the rewarding properties of a variety of appetite reinforcers.

Morphine induced changes in ethanol-and water-intake are attenuated by the 5-HT3/4 antagonist tropisetron (ICS 205-930)

The opiate agonist morphine has been shown to increase ethanol intake and mesolimbic dopamine (DA) levels. Conversely, the 5-HT3/4 antagonist tropisetron has been shown to decrease ethanol intake and morphine-induced increases in mesolimbic DA levels. This study was designed to test the effects of acutely administered tropisetron on morphine-induced changes in ethanol (6% v/v) and water intake in a two-bottle test procedure. Ten water restricted male rats were injected with combinations of morphine (0.0, 0.56, 1.0, 1.5, 10.0, and 17.0 mg/kg, SC) and tropisetron (0.0, 1.0, 10.0, and 17.0 mg/kg, SC) prior to test sessions. Morphine (1.0 and 1.5 mg/kg) significantly increased absolute (g/kg) and relative ethanol intake (ethanol/total fluid). Tropisetron alone did not affect ethanol or water intake. When tropisetron (10.0 and 17.0 mg/kg) was administered in combination with morphine (1.5 mg/kg), the increase in ethanol intake induced by morphine was attenuated. Tropisetron (1.0 mg/kg) reversed a decrease in ethanol intake induced by morphine (17.0 mg/kg). The two highest doses of tropisetron partially attenuated a significant decrease in water intake produced by morphine (17.0 mg/kg). These data suggest that opiate and 5-HT3 mechanisms could interact in the regulation of ethanol intake. However, the doses of tropisetron tested were high and, therefore, the potential involvement of 5-HT4 receptors or other neurotransmitter systems in regulating ethanol intake is discussed.

Endogenous opiates: 1992

This paper is the fifteenth installment of our annual review of research concerning the opiate system. It includes papers published during 1992 involving the behavioral, non-analgesic, effects of the endogenous opiate peptides. The specific topics this year include stress; tolerance and dependence; eating; drinking; gastrointestinal and renal function; mental illness and mood; learning, memory, and reward; cardiovascular responses; respiration and thermoregulation; seizures and other neurological disorders; electrical-related activity; general activity and locomotion; sex, pregnancy, and development; immunological responses; and other behaviors.

A small dose of morphine leads rats to drink more alcohol and achieve higher blood alcohol concentrations

Male Sprague-Dawley rats were maintained on a daily regimen of 22 hr of fluid deprivation followed by a 2-hr opportunity to take a sweetened alcoholic beverage and water for over 6 months. During the week before the formal procedures of the experiment described herein, access to the alcoholic beverage was limited to 1.5 hr, but access to water was still for 2 hr. Intakes of ethanol, in terms of g/kg, were tabulated at 30 min for half of the rats and at 90 min for the rest. On the day of formal procedures, half of the rats of the 30- and 90-min measures were given 1 mg/kg of morphine sulfate just before the drinking session, whereas the rest received physiological saline. Morphine increased mean g/kg intakes of ethanol, as compared with controls, at 30 and 90 min. Blood alcohol levels were also increased. These data suggest that the well-documented ability of small doses of morphine to increase rats' intake of ethanol is probably not related to its ability to produce gastrointestinal effects, but rather due to its ability to modulate central motivational mechanisms associated with ingestion.