Despite the similarities of prepulse inhibition (PPI) of the startle reflex and its apparent neural regulation in rodents and humans, it has been difficult to demonstrate cross-species homology in the sensitivity of PPI to pharmacologic challenges. PPI is disrupted in rats by the indirect dopamine (DA) agonist amphetamine, and while studies in humans have suggested similar effects of amphetamine, these effects have been limited to populations characterized by smoking status and specific personality features. In the context of a study assessing the time course of several DA agonist effects on physiological variables, we failed to detect PPI-disruptive effects of amphetamine in a small group of normal males. The present study was designed to reexamine this issue, using a larger sample and a paradigm that should be more sensitive for detecting drug effects. PPI in rats was shown to be disrupted by the highest dose of amphetamine (3.0 mg/kg) at relatively longer prepulse intervals (430 ms). In humans, between-subject comparisons of placebo (n ¼ 15) vs 20 mg amphetamine (n ¼ 15) failed to detect significant PPI-disruptive effects of amphetamine, but significant PPI-disruptive effects at short (10-20 ms) prepulse intervals were detected using within-subject analyses of postdrug PPI levels relative to each subject's baseline PPI. Post hoc comparisons failed to detect greater sensitivity to amphetamine among subjects characterized by different personality and physiological traits. Bioactivity of amphetamine was verified by autonomic and subjective changes. These results provide modest support for crossspecies homology in the PPI-disruptive effects of amphetamine, but suggest that these effects in humans at the present dose are subtle and may be best detected using within-subject designs and specific stimulus characteristics.

Amantadine modifies prepulse effects on startle in rats and humans, and disrupts prepulse effects on perceived stimulus intensity in humans; bromocriptine has clear effects on PPI in rats, but not in humans. The divergent effects of amantadine on sensorimotor and sensory effects of prepulses may reflect a divergence of brain circuitry regulating these processes.

Startle may be inhibited when the startling event is preceded by a stimulus; this is called prepulse inhibition (PPI) when the prestimulus is weak and nonstartling (s) and paired pulse inhibition when the prestimulus elicits startle (S1). The authors examined the relationship of these measures across species and tested whether paired pulse inhibition--like PPI--is independent of the startling effects of the prestimulus. PPI (s-S1 configuration) and paired pulse inhibition (S1-S2 configuration) were elicited in 1 test, using similar stimulus parameters in rats and humans. The amount of PPI and paired pulse inhibition was significantly correlated within subjects in both rats and humans. Paired pulse inhibition was not diminished when the startling effects of S1 were eliminated by a weak prepulse (s-S1-S2 configuration), nor was it enhanced when these prepulse effects were eliminated by the dopamine agonist apomorphine (in rats). Despite apparent differences in the inhibitory processes mediating PPI and paired pulse inhibition, both are independent of the motoric response to the prestimulus.

Latent inhibition (LI) is the delayed learning of an association when the conditioned stimulus has previously been experienced out of the context of that association. LI can be measured across species and has been used to understand the neurobiology of schizophrenia, since some reports suggest that schizophrenia patients exhibit LI deficits. One challenge of LI studies in humans has resulted from the fact that LI paradigms have almost uniformly involved between-subject comparisons. We now report a new within-subject paradigm that detected LI in normal adult male subjects after ingestion of a placebo. After amphetamine (20 mg p.o.) or bromocriptine (1.25 mg p.o.), LI was not evident, suggesting that the LI detected by this paradigm is sensitive to disruption by dopamine agonists. The apparent advantages and limitations of this paradigm are discussed with regard to its future use in understanding the neural basis of reported LI deficits in schizophrenia.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract