Quantitative trait locus analysis identifies rat genomic regions related to amphetamine-induced locomotion and Galpha(i3) levels in nucleus accumbens

Lewis rats have greater response impulsivity than Fischer rats

Impulsivity, a tendency toward immediate action without consideration of future consequences, is associated with a wide array of problematic behaviors. Response impulsivity, a type of behaviorally-assessed impulsivity characterized by behavioral disinhibition, is also associated with health risk behaviors. Response impulsivity is distinct from choice impulsivity, which is characterized by intolerance for delay. Lewis rats have higher levels of choice impulsivity than Fischer rats (Anderson & Woolverton, 2005; Madden et al., 2008; Stein et al., 2012). However, no studies have examined whether Lewis and Fischer rats have different levels of response impulsivity. The present research examined response impulsivity in the two rat strains. Subjects were 16 male Lewis and Fischer rats. Rats' response impulsivity was measured using the Five Choice Serial Reaction Time Task (5-CSRTT). In addition, their locomotor activity was measured in locomotor activity chambers. Lewis rats had more premature responses than Fischer rats during the 5-CSRTT assessment [F(1, 14)=5.34, p<0.05], indicating higher levels of response impulsivity. Locomotor activity did not differ between rat strain groups [F(1, 14)=3.05, p=.10], suggesting that overall movement did not account for group differences in response impulsivity on the 5-CSRTT. It can be concluded from this research that Lewis rats have higher levels of response impulsivity than Fischer rats, and therefore provide a valid rat model of individual differences in impulsivity.

A genetic animal model of differential sensitivity to methamphetamine reinforcement

Sensitivity to reinforcement from methamphetamine (MA) likely influences risk for MA addiction, and genetic differences are one source of individual variation. Generation of two sets of selectively bred mouse lines for high and low MA drinking has shown that genetic factors influence MA intake, and pronounced differences in sensitivity to rewarding and aversive effects of MA play a significant role. Further validation of these lines as a unique genetic model relevant to MA addiction was obtained using operant methods to study MA reinforcement. High and low MA drinking line mice were used to test the hypotheses that: 1) oral and intracerebroventricular (ICV) MA serve as behavioral reinforcers, and 2) MA exhibits greater reinforcing efficacy in high than low MA drinking mice. Operant responses resulted in access to an MA or non-MA drinking tube or intracranial delivery of MA. Behavioral activation consequent to orally consumed MA was determined. MA available for consumption maintained higher levels of reinforced instrumental responding in high than low MA drinking line mice, and MA intake in the oral operant procedure was greater in high than low MA drinking line mice. Behavioral activation was associated with amount of MA consumed during operant sessions. High line mice delivered more MA via ICV infusion than did low line mice across a range of doses. Thus, genetic risk factors play a critical role in the reinforcing efficacy of MA and the oral self-administration procedure is suitable for delineating genetic contributions to MA reinforcement.

From the cell to the clinic: a comparative review of the partial D₂/D₃receptor agonist and α2-adrenoceptor antagonist, piribedil, in the treatment of Parkinson's disease

Though L-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (L-DOPA) is universally employed for alleviation of motor dysfunction in Parkinson's disease (PD), it is poorly-effective against co-morbid symptoms like cognitive impairment and depression. Further, it elicits dyskinesia, its pharmacokinetics are highly variable, and efficacy wanes upon long-term administration. Accordingly, "dopaminergic agonists" are increasingly employed both as adjuncts to L-DOPA and as monotherapy. While all recognize dopamine D(2) receptors, they display contrasting patterns of interaction with other classes of monoaminergic receptor. For example, pramipexole and ropinirole are high efficacy agonists at D(2) and D(3) receptors, while pergolide recognizes D(1), D(2) and D(3) receptors and a broad suite of serotonergic receptors. Interestingly, several antiparkinson drugs display modest efficacy at D(2) receptors. Of these, piribedil displays the unique cellular signature of: 1), signal-specific partial agonist actions at dopamine D(2)and D(3) receptors; 2), antagonist properties at α(2)-adrenoceptors and 3), minimal interaction with serotonergic receptors. Dopamine-deprived striatal D(2) receptors are supersensitive in PD, so partial agonism is sufficient for relief of motor dysfunction while limiting undesirable effects due to "over-dosage" of "normosensitive" D(2) receptors elsewhere. Further, α(2)-adrenoceptor antagonism reinforces adrenergic, dopaminergic and cholinergic transmission to favourably influence motor function, cognition, mood and the integrity of dopaminergic neurones. In reviewing the above issues, the present paper focuses on the distinctive cellular, preclinical and therapeutic profile of piribedil, comparisons to pramipexole, ropinirole and pergolide, and the core triad of symptoms that characterises PD-motor dysfunction, depressed mood and cognitive impairment. The article concludes by highlighting perspectives for clarifying the mechanisms of action of piribedil and other antiparkinson agents, and for optimizing their clinical exploitation.