4.5 Article

Antagonism of the dopamine D1-like receptor in mesocorticolimbic nuclei attenuates acute food deprivation-induced reinstatement of heroin seeking in rats

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
卷 37, 期 6, 页码 972-981

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ejn.12112

关键词

relapse; SCH 23390; self-administration; stress

资金

  1. Natural Science & Engineering Council Discovery Program
  2. Canada Research Chair program
  3. Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  4. Fonds de Recherche du Quebec-Sante

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The neurotransmitter dopamine (DA) plays a critical role in both priming-and cue-induced reinstatement of extinguished drug-seeking behavior, but its role in stress-induced reinstatement is less clear. Our laboratory has recently demonstrated that systemic administration of the DA D1-like receptor antagonist, SCH 23390, attenuates acute food deprivation (FD) stress-induced reinstatement. The current study was designed to elucidate the brain regions critical to the effect of SCH 23390 on FD stress-induced reinstatement. Rats were trained to press a lever to self-administer heroin (0.1mg/kg/inf) over a period of 10days. Following training, heroin was removed leading to an extinction of lever pressing. Next, rats were tested for reinstatement twice, under extinction conditions: once following 2148h FD; and once under sated conditions. Prior to testing, SCH 23390 was administered into the nucleus accumbens (NAc) shell (0.0, 0.3, 0.6g/side), NAc core (0.0, 0.3, 0.6g/side), dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (dmPFC; 0.0, 0.2, 2.0g/side), ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC; 0.0, 2.0g/side) or basolateral amygdala (BLA; 0.0, 1.0, 2.0g/side). An attenuation of FD-induced reinstatement of heroin seeking was seen in rats injected with SCH 23390 into the NAc shell, dmPFC or BLA, but not into the NAc core or the vmPFC. These findings support the hypothesis that DA transmission through the DA D1-like receptors plays a critical role in stress-induced reinstatement of heroin seeking.

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