2014
DOI: 10.1038/npp.2014.237
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Neurodevelopment and the Origins of Brain Disorders

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
40
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(45 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
(12 reference statements)
4
40
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Notably, these results differ from Jedynak et al (13), who noted that the same cocaine conditioning paradigm enhanced AMPAR function in the NAc core as assessed by electrically-evoked AMPAR/NMDAR and miniature EPSC (mEPSC) amplitude. These discrepancies may be explained by technical differences, biology, or both.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Notably, these results differ from Jedynak et al (13), who noted that the same cocaine conditioning paradigm enhanced AMPAR function in the NAc core as assessed by electrically-evoked AMPAR/NMDAR and miniature EPSC (mEPSC) amplitude. These discrepancies may be explained by technical differences, biology, or both.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
“…The output neurons of the NAc, medium spiny neurons (MSNs), are largely distinguished by expression of dopamine receptor subtype 1 or 2 (D1 or D2). While both D1 (4; 7; 913) and D2 (10; 11; 14) NAc MSN subtypes have been shown to undergo drug-induced changes in AMPAR function, these changes occur in an experience-, subregion-, and input-specific manner. In contrast to AMPARs, drug-induced changes in NAc N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) function have been less well documented.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Identifying regions that exhibited significant activation within one group of participants and using them as inclusive masks for correcting multiple comparisons in between-group analyses in the same sample is a commonly used procedure in multiple domains of research (e.g. Labuschagne, et al, 2010; Rizio & Dennis, 2014; Williams et al, 2015), and allows us to examine BI-group differences in task-related executive control regions.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In studies measuring the rewarding effects of drugs using a conditioned place preference (CPP) paradigm, Taar 1−/− mice acquired methamphetamine-induced CPP earlier than wild-type mice and exhibited higher CPP score during extinction training sessions, which suggests that the conditioned rewarding effect of methamphetamine is greater in Taar 1−/− mice (Achat-Mendes et al, 2012). In Taar 1−/− mice, animals drank more methamphetamine and exhibited insensitivity to the aversive property of methamphetamine as compared to the wild-type mice (Harkness et al, 2015), suggesting that TAAR 1 function modulates methamphetamine consumption. Interestingly, there was no difference between those two genotypes of mice in morphine CPP (Achat-Mendes et al, 2012), suggesting an interesting differentiation between morphine and psychostimulants.…”
Section: Taar 1 Functionality: Lessons Learned From Genetically-momentioning
confidence: 99%