Effects of an ethanol-paired CS on responding for ethanol and food: Comparisons with a stimulus in a Truly-Random-Control group and to a food-paired CS on responding for food

Effects of an ethanol-paired conditioned stimulus on responding for ethanol suppressed by a conditioned-taste-aversion

Ethanol-Paired Conditioned Stimuli (CS) can increase ethanol-responding either in extinction or occurring at low rates late in a session. To examine the generality of CS-induced increases in ethanol-responding, we examined whether a CS could increase responding suppressed by Conditioned-Taste-Aversion (CTA), which presumably suppresses responding by changing ethanol's valence from positive to negative. Rats were trained to respond for ethanol under a Random Interval (RI) schedule. We then removed the lever and paired Random-Time ethanol deliveries with illumination of a stimulus light (i.e., CS) for 10 sessions. Results were compared with a Truly Random Control group, in which the light and ethanol deliveries occurred independently. In a subsequent experiment, rats were treated similarly, except the light served as a discriminative stimulus, as the lever was extended and ethanol deliveries were available under a RI during light presentations. After this training, the lever was returned and rats again responded for ethanol. Subsequently, sessions were followed by LiCl administration. When responding reached low levels, LiCl administration stopped and the light was occasionally illuminated during the session. Responding during the light presentation was compared to responding during the period preceding light presentation. Responding partially recovered across 10 sessions and was greater during light presentations than in the period before it in all three groups. Increases were not reliably different between the groups, indicating that explanations for these increases such as CS-induced increases in motivation or approach toward the light are unlikely to be correct. The most likely explanation for these light-induced increases is that during sessions in which the light had been presented previously, LiCl had never been presented and thus, the light had come to signal that ethanol was safe to drink.

Ethanol-paired conditioned stimulus effects on concurrent reinforced responding for ethanol and food

The influence of Pavlovian Conditioned Stimuli (CS) on ethanol self-administration and choice between ethanol and an alternative are potentially important. Ethanol-paired CS might increase ethanol self-administration, especially when it has been reduced during recovery, though the selectivity of these increases has been questioned. To date, one study examined the effects of an ethanol-paired CS on ethanol choice and found that the CS increased ethanol-responding more than food-responding when both were in extinction. However, it remains unclear whether ethanol-paired CS increase ethanol-choice that is not in extinction. Here, we examine the effects of an ethanol-paired CS on ethanol-choice when both food- and ethanol-responding are reinforced. Sixteen adult male Lewis rats were trained on a concurrent schedule to respond for ethanol on one lever and for food on the other lever. Ethanol was available under an FR 5 schedule, and food was available under an FR schedule that was adjusted for each rat to earn an equal number of food and ethanol deliveries. Then, 2-min light presentations were paired with an RT 25-sec schedule of ethanol delivery for 10 sessions in the absence of both levers. After this, subjects were placed back on the concurrent schedule for one session, then five sessions with the CS being present or absent on each trial of the concurrent schedule occurred. Rats learned to respond on one lever for ethanol and on the other for food and earned similar numbers of ethanol and food deliveries. During Pavlovian Conditioning, the number of head entries into the head-entry detector was higher in the presence of the CS than in its absence. In the test sessions, rats made more ethanol responses in the presence of the CS than in its absence. However, this effect was small and did not increase the amount of ethanol earned. Thus, ethanol-paired CS could increase ethanol-responding under a choice procedure but did not increase ethanol consumption meaningfully under the studied conditions.

Conditioned stimulus effects on paired or alternative reinforcement depend on presentation duration: Implications for conceptualizations of craving

Conditioned stimuli (CS) associated with alcohol ingestion are thought to play a role in relapse by producing a craving that in turn increases motivation to drink which increases ethanol-seeking and disrupts other ongoing behavior. Alternatively, such CS may provide information indicating a likely increase in the density of the paired unconditioned stimulus and simultaneously elicit behavior that may be incompatible with other ongoing behavior, i.e., approach toward the CS. To explore these possibilities, rats were trained to respond for ethanol or food in two different components of the same session after which a light above the ethanol-lever was lighted twice during each component and each light presentation was followed by ethanol delivery. The duration of this CS was 10 s initially and then increased to 30 s, then to 100 s, and finally returned to 30 s. The change in responding for ethanol or food was compared to a matched period immediately preceding CS presentation. The CS presentation increased responding to ethanol, and this effect increases with longer CS presentations. In contrast, the CS presentation decreased responding to food, and this effect decreases with longer CS presentations. These results appear to support the informational account of CS action rather than simply a change in the motivation to seek and consume ethanol. This suggests that craving as it is commonly understood likely represents multiple behavioral processes, not simply increased desire for alcohol and that reports of craving likely reflect labeling based upon past experiences rather than a cause of future drug-taking.

Instrumental and Pavlovian Mechanisms in Alcohol Use Disorder

Purpose of Review

Current theories of alcohol use disorders (AUD) highlight the importance of Pavlovian and instrumental learning processes mainly based on preclinical animal studies. Here, we summarize available evidence for alterations of those processes in human participants with AUD with a focus on habitual versus goal-directed instrumental learning, Pavlovian conditioning, and Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT) paradigms.

Recent Findings

The balance between habitual and goal-directed control in AUD participants has been studied using outcome devaluation or sequential decision-making procedures, which have found some evidence of reduced goal-directed/model-based control, but little evidence for stronger habitual responding. The employed Pavlovian learning and PIT paradigms have shown considerable differences regarding experimental procedures, e.g., alcohol-related or conventional reinforcers or stimuli.

Summary

While studies of basic learning processes in human participants with AUD support a role of Pavlovian and instrumental learning mechanisms in the development and maintenance of drug addiction, current studies are characterized by large variability regarding methodology, sample characteristics, and results, and translation from animal paradigms to human research remains challenging. Longitudinal approaches with reliable and ecologically valid paradigms of Pavlovian and instrumental processes, including alcohol-related cues and outcomes, are warranted and should be combined with state-of-the-art imaging techniques, computational approaches, and ecological momentary assessment methods.

Ethanol-paired stimuli can increase reinforced ethanol responding

While ethanol-paired stimuli are frequently postulated to increase drinking motivation and thus increase ethanol responding and precipitate relapse, no study has demonstrated increases in ethanol-reinforced responding following presentation of an ethanol-paired stimulus that had not previously been part of a contingent relationship. Previous studies have shown that food-paired stimuli can increase food responding that is at low rates and increase food consumption in food-sated rats. In Experiment 1, we show that an ethanol-paired stimulus can increase ethanol responding that is at low levels late in the experimental session, presumably due to satiation. However, these increases may have resulted from either associative or non-associative mechanisms. In Experiment 2, we compared the effects of an ethanol-paired stimulus to those of the same stimulus in a Truly-Random-Control group. In a Truly-Random-Control, the stimulus and ethanol each are presented on independent random schedules, and thus any differences between the effects of the stimulus in the experimental and control groups is likely attributable to the association between the stimulus and ethanol. The stimulus increased ethanol-reinforced responding in both the experimental and control groups, but these increases were greater in the experimental than the control group. Thus, both stimulus-change and the pairing of the stimulus with ethanol may result in increases in ethanol-reinforced responding.

Evidence for incentive salience sensitization as a pathway to alcohol use disorder

The incentive salience sensitization (ISS) theory of addiction holds that addictive behavior stems from the ability of drugs to progressively sensitize the brain circuitry that mediates attribution of incentive salience (IS) to reward-predictive cues and its behavioral manifestations. In this article, we establish the plausibility of ISS as an etiological pathway to alcohol use disorder (AUD). We provide a comprehensive and critical review of evidence for: (1) the ability of alcohol to sensitize the brain circuitry of IS attribution and expression; and (2) attribution of IS to alcohol-predictive cues and its sensitization in humans and non-human animals. We point out gaps in the literature and how these might be addressed. We also highlight how individuals with different alcohol subjective response phenotypes may differ in susceptibility to ISS as a pathway to AUD. Finally, we discuss important implications of this neuropsychological mechanism in AUD for psychological and pharmacological interventions attempting to attenuate alcohol craving and cue reactivity.

Cue-alcohol associative learning in female rats

The ability of environmental cues to trigger alcohol-seeking behaviors is believed to facilitate problematic alcohol use. We previously showed that the development of this cue-evoked alcohol approach reflects cue-alcohol learning and memory in the adult male rat; however, we do not know whether the same is true for similarly aged female rats. Consequently, adult Long-Evans female rats were allowed to drink unsweetened alcohol in the home cage (Monday, Wednesday, Friday; 24-h two-bottle choice; 5 weeks) and were subsequently split into two experimental groups: Paired and Unpaired. Groups were matched for ingested doses and alcohol bottle preference across the pre-conditioning home cage period. Both groups were trained in conditioning chambers using a Pavlovian procedure. For the Paired group, the chamber houselight was illuminated to signal access to an alcohol sipper. Houselight onset was yoked for the Unpaired group, but access to the alcohol sipper was scheduled to occur only during the intervening periods (in the absence of light). We found that in the Paired, but not Unpaired group, an alcohol approach reaction was conditioned to houselight illumination, and the level of cue-conditioned reactivity predicted drinking behavior within trials. Groups experienced equivalently low but non-negligible blood alcohol concentrations over the course of conditioning sessions. We conclude that cue-triggered alcohol-seeking behavior in adult female rats reflects associative learning about the relationship between alcohol availability and houselight illumination.

Effects of rat strain and method of inducing ethanol drinking on Pavlovian-Instrumental-Transfer with ethanol-paired conditioned stimuli

Ethanol-paired conditioned stimuli (CSs) are widely thought to invigorate ethanol responding, and thus, precipitate relapse to drinking. However, preclinical studies investigating this issue using Pavlovian-Instrumental-Transfer (PIT) procedures have had mixed results, with some studies finding PIT while others did not. The studies failing to show PIT used Lewis rats and induced ethanol drinking using a post-prandial drinking procedure. The present experiments examined whether either of these two variables influenced the magnitude of PIT observed. In the first experiment, ethanol drinking in Lewis rats was induced using either sucrose fading or post-prandial drinking. In the second experiment, ethanol drinking was induced using post-prandial drinking in either Long-Evans Hooded or Lewis rats. In both experiments, rats were trained to respond for ethanol under a random interval schedule. Subsequently with the lever removed, 2-min light presentations were paired with ethanol deliveries. Finally, with the lever returned, the effect of light presentations on responding was tested while responding was in extinction. Light presentations similarly affected responding in Lewis rats regardless of the method of drinking induction. Likewise, light presentations similarly affected responding in both Lewis and Long-Evans Hooded rats. Neither ethanol induction method nor rat strain affected the magnitude of PIT observed, and thus, neither likely explains previous failures to observe PIT with ethanol-maintained behavior.

Outcome-specific Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT) with alcohol cues and its extinction

The acquired motivational impact of conditioned stimuli has been studied using the Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT) task, where a cue paired with a reward is consistently shown to energize responses separately trained with that same reward ("specific" PIT). However, most alcohol studies have shown that alcohol-related cues elevate responses trained with either the same alcohol reward or with other non-alcoholic rewards ("general" PIT). The effects of extinction on this alcohol PIT effect have not been fully explored. We tested the hypothesis that cues signaling different-tasting alcohols might acquire specific craving reactions for those alcohols leading to specific PIT, but that these effects might be sensitive to extinction. Three experiments examined the specificity of PIT using alcohol and non-alcohol outcomes. Rats first consumed different-flavored alcohol solutions in their home cages. Then they were trained to perform two responses, each reinforced with distinctly flavored solutions, using a Polycose fading procedure. The outcomes were sweet (4% sucrose) or salty (0.9% NaCl) ethanol (10% v/v) solutions (Experiments 1 and 2) or one plain or salty alcohol vs. a non-alcoholic sweet solution (Experiment 3). Then, two cues were each differentially paired with these outcomes. In PIT tests, animals performed both responses in the presence and absence of these cues without any rewards. Experiments 1, 2, and 3 showed that a cue paired with a flavored alcohol produced a small but consistent bias toward the response trained with the same alcohol solution (specific PIT). Experiment 2 showed that extinction eliminated this effect. Experiment 3 demonstrated that specific PIT occurred when contrasting salty, or plain, alcohol to a non-alcoholic solution. These results provide evidence that alcohol-related stimuli can elicit craving for specific types of alcohol (as revealed by specific PIT), but that this effect is sensitive to extinction. This paradigm of contrasting two distinctly flavored alcohols may be an especially useful animal model of alcohol addiction.

Nicotine as a discriminative stimulus for ethanol use

Abused drugs reinforce behavior; i.e., they increase the probability of the behavior preceding their administration. Abused drugs can also act as discriminative stimuli; i.e., they can set the occasion for responding reinforced by another event. Thus, one abused drug could come to set the occasion for the use of another and this functional relationship may play a role in polysubstance abuse, where common patterns of use could result in this relationship. Here we establish nicotine (0.4mg/kg, ip 5-min pre-session) as a discriminative stimulus for behavior reinforced by ethanol (0.1ml 8% w/v po, versus food) and determine the ability of nicotine (0.02-0.4mg/kg), varenicline (0.1-3.0mg/kg), and ethanol (250 and 500mg/kg) to control responding for ethanol. We compare these results to those from rats where nicotine signaled food was available (and ethanol was not). Nicotine came to function as a discriminative stimulus. Nicotine and varenicline produced dose-dependent increases in responding on the nicotine-appropriate lever while ethanol produced responding on the vehicle-appropriate lever. Whether this responding occurred on the lever that produced ethanol or food access depended on the training condition. These results demonstrate that a drug can come to set the occasion for use of another and suggest that this behavioral mechanism could play an important role in the maintenance of and recovery from polysubstance abuse, depending on the pattern of use.

Conditioned Stimulus Form Does Not Explain Failures to See Pavlovian-Instrumental-Transfer With Ethanol-Paired Conditioned Stimuli

BACKGROUND

Pavlovian-Instrumental-Transfer (PIT) examines the effects of associative learning upon instrumental responding. Previous studies examining PIT with ethanol (EtOH)-maintained responding showed increases in responding following presentation of an EtOH-paired conditioned stimulus (CS). Recently, we conducted 2 studies examining PIT with an EtOH-paired CS. One of these found increases in responding, while the other did not. This less robust demonstration of PIT may have resulted from the form of the CS used, as we used a 120-second light stimulus as a CS, while the previous studies used either a 120-second auditory stimulus or a 10-second light stimulus. This study examined whether using conditions similar to our earlier study, but with either a 120-second auditory or a 10-second light stimulus as a CS, resulted in more robust PIT. We also examined the reliability of our previous failure to observe PIT.

METHODS

Three experiments were conducted examining whether PIT was obtained using (i) a 120-second light stimulus, (ii) a 10-second light stimulus, or (iii) a 120-second auditory stimulus as CSs.

RESULTS

We found PIT was not obtained using (i) a 120-second light stimulus as a CS, (ii) a 10-second light stimulus as a CS, or (iii) a 120-second auditory stimulus as a CS.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that CS form does not account for our earlier failure to see PIT. Rather, factors like rat strain or how EtOH drinking is induced may account for when PIT is or is not observed.