4.7 Review

The Vogel conflict test:: procedural aspects, γ-aminobutyric acid, glutamate and monoamines

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PHARMACOLOGY
卷 463, 期 1-3, 页码 67-96

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/S0014-2999(03)01275-5

关键词

anxiety; anxiolytic; anxiogenic; stress; limbic system; benzodiazepine; 5-HT1A receptor

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A multitude of mechanisms are involved in the control of emotion and in the response to stress. These incorporate mediators/targets as diverse as gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA), excitatory amino acids, monoamines, hormones, neurotrophins and various neuropeptides. Behavioural models are indispensable for characterization of the neuronal substrates underlying their implication in the etiology of anxiety, and of their potential therapeutic pertinence to its management. Of considerable significance in this regard are conflict paradigms in which the influence of drugs upon conditioned (trained) behaviours is examined. For example, the Vogel conflict test, which was introduced some 30 years ago, measures the ability of drugs to release the drinking behaviour of water-deprived rats exposed to a mild aversive stimulus (punishment). This model, of which numerous procedural variants are discussed herein, has been widely used in the evaluation of potential anxiolytic agents. In particular, it has been exploited in the characterization of drugs interacting with GABAergic, glutamatergic and monoaminergic networks, the actions of which in the Vogel conflict test are summarized in this article. More recently, the effects of drugs acting at neuropeptide receptors have been examined with this model. It is concluded that the Vogel conflict test is of considerable utility for rapid exploration of the actions of anxiolytic (and anxiogenic) drugs. Indeed, in view of its clinical relevance, broader exploitation of the Vogel conflict test in the identification of novel classes of anxiolytic agents, and in the determination of their mechanisms of action, would prove instructive. (C) 2003 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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