4.5 Article

Dynamic Changes of Tyrosine Hydroxylase and Dopamine Concentrations in the Ventral Tegmental Area-Nucleus Accumbens Projection During the Expression of Morphine-Induced Conditioned Place Preference in Rats

期刊

NEUROCHEMICAL RESEARCH
卷 37, 期 7, 页码 1482-1489

出版社

SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1007/s11064-012-0739-8

关键词

Morphine; Conditioned place preference (CPP); Dopamine (DA); Tyrosine hydroxylase (TH)

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation [30970933]
  2. National Basic Research Program [2009CB522003]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Our previous study demonstrated that morphine dose- and time-dependently elevated dopamine (DA) concentrations in the nucleus accumbens (NAc) during the expression of morphine-induced conditioned place preference (CPP) in rats. However, still unknown are how DA concentrations dynamically change during the morphine-induced CPP test and whether tyrosine hydroxylase (TH) activity in the ventral tegmental area (VTA) plays a vital role in this process. In the present study, we measured dynamic changes in TH and phosphorylated TH serine 40 (pTH Ser(40)) and pTH Ser(31) proteins in the VTA, and DA concentrations in the NAc at 5 min intervals during a 30 min morphine-induced CPP test. Rats that underwent morphine-induced CPP training significantly preferred the morphine-paired chamber during the CPP expression test, an effect that lasted at least 30 min in the drug-free state. DA concentrations in the NAc markedly increased at 15 min when the rats were returned to the CPP boxes to assess the expression of preference for the previously drug-paired chamber. DA concentrations then declined 2 h after the CPP test. TH and pTH Ser(40) levels, but not pTH Ser(31) levels, in the VTA were enhanced during the CPP test. These results indicated that TH and the phosphorylation of TH Ser(40) in the VTA may be responsible for DA synthesis and release in the NAc during the behavioral expression of conditioned reward elicited by a drug-associated context.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据