Differential effects of nicotine and amphetamine on locomotor activity and maze exploration in two rat lines

Abstract

Separate groups of two different rat breeding lines, Roman High Avoidance (RHA/Verh.) and Roman Low Avoidance (RLA/Verh.), treated with either saline, nicotine (0.2 mg/kg), or amphetamine (0.4 mg/kg) were compared for exploratory efficiency and for exploratory locomotion by using two different mazes on alternate testing days. The RHA/Verh. rats generally showed more locomotion but less intermaze transfer of exploratory efficency than the RLA/Verh. rats. Nicotine did not alter exploratory efficiency but stimulated locomotor activity in the RHA/Verh. rats, while it did not significantly alter either category of behavior in the RLA/Verh. rats. Amphetamine stimulated locomotor activity in both rat lines but this stimulation was weaker in comparison with that of nicotine. In contrast to nicotine, amphetamine impaired exploratory efficiency in the RHA/Verh. rats. Like nicotine, amphetamine did not significantly affect exploratory efficiency in the RLA/Verh. rats. The results demonstrate that, when the two lines of rats are compared, there is a dissociation of the two categories of behavior and a further differentiation between nicotine and amphetamine effects.

Multiple effects of tetrahydroaminoacridine on the cholinergic system: Biochemical and behavioural aspects

“…It is possible that at low concentrations, THA acts as the antagonist scopolamine (blocking cholinergic activity) and causing an increase in horizontal (locomotion) and vertical (rearing) activity. Low doses of nicotine (0.05-0.5) have also been found to cause an increase in rearing (Garg, 1969) and motor acitivity (Schlatter and B/ittig, 1979;Bryson etal., 1981). We have shown earlier that THA is effective at displacing 3H-nicotine from human brain membranes (Nilsson etal., 1987).…”

Non-invasive in vivo infrared laser spectroscopy to analyse endogenous oxy-haemoglobin, deoxy-haemoglobin, and blood volume in the rat CNS

“…Statistical analysis (oneway ANOVA and Bonferroni test) for each parameter separately show significant differences: HbO 2 : F(2,9) = 40.08, p = 0.000; Hb: F(2,9) = 4.60, p = 0.0015; V: F(2,9) = 36.23, p = 0.000; * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01. 0.4 mg/kg s.c., respectively) (Schlatter and Battig, 1979;Swerdlow et al, 1985) on the levels of HbO 2 , Hb and V monitored in an intact rat whole brain. Both compounds differentially modified the three parameters measured as shown in Fig.…”

Inbred mouse strains vary in oral self-selection of nicotine

“…Similarly, studies done in animals have identified responses to nicotine that are regulated by genetic factors. For example, both rat (Garg 1969;B~ittig et al 1976;Schlatter and B~ittig 1979) and mouse (Marks et al 1985b(Marks et al , 1989a) strains differ in sensitivity to the effects of an acute dose of nicotine on locomotor activity. Inbred strains of mice also differ in sensitivity to the effects of challenge doses of nicotine on physiological parameters such as respiratory rate, heart rate and body temperature and to the effects of nicotine on acoustic startle and in sensitivity to nicotine-induced convulsions (Marks et al 1985b(Marks et al , 1989aMiner et al 1986;Collins et al 1988;Miner and Collins 1989).…”