(—)‐nicotine produces conditioned place preference in Lewis, but not Fischer 344 rats

Abstract

In this study, we sought to determine if Fischer 344 (F344) and Lewis rats showed different conditioned place preference (CPP) responses to subcutaneously administered (-)-nicotine. Lewis rats displayed a CPP response to (-)-nicotine after five pairings, whereas F344 rats showed no preference for nicotine compared to vehicle. After 10 pairings, the F344 rats showed a conditioned place aversion to (-)-nicotine, whereas the Lewis rats still displayed a significant CPP response. These results suggest that the differences in appetitiveness shown between Lewis and F344 rats to other drugs of abuse extend also to (-)-nicotine.

Neonatal ethanol exposure produces a hyperalgesia that extends into adolescence, and is associated with increased analgesic and rewarding properties of nicotine in rats

“…Ethanol-exposed offspring showed clear evidence of CPP to nicotine while there was no evidence of CPP in ethanol-naive rats. Other authors have observed no, or weak, reinforcing effects of nicotine; however, our doses were well below those that have previously been used in CPP studies with nicotine (Fudala et al 1985;Clarke and Fibiger 1987;Shoaib et al 1994;Horan et al 1997). Our experiment differed from previous studies of nicotineinduced CPP because we measured preference with nicotine on board.…”

“…One problem is that both ethanol (Samson et al 2000) and nicotine (Dougherty et al 1981;Iwamoto and Martin 1988) are relatively weak positive reinforcers in rats. Simple tests of positive reinforcement, such as conditioned place preference (CPP), typically provide weak and variable responses to ethanol (Reid et al 1985;Bienkowski et al 1995;Matsuzawa et al 2000) or nicotine (Fudala et al 1985;Clarke and Fibiger 1987;Shoaib et al 1994;Horan et al 1997). However, the weakly reinforcing properties of these drugs might provide an advantage in testing our hypothesis.…”

Nicotine induces conditioned place preferences over a large range of doses in rats

“…Several factors that may influence nicotine's ability to induce CPP are listed: the strain of the rats, the dose of nicotine used, the duration of individual conditioning sessions, the number of drug-conditioning sessions (total conditioning sessions are twice this value), the choice of a biased or unbiased procedure and the presence of a preexposure period to the apparatus before the start of conditioning sessions. Other factors have not been included in Fudala et al (1985) SpragueDawley 0.1, 1.2 3 20 15 -Bias CPP Fudala and Iwamoto (1986) SpragueDawley 0.05, 0.8, 2 3 2 0 1 5 -Bias CPP, no effect if administered more than 20 min before the session Fudala and Iwamoto (1987) SpragueDawley 0.05, 0.8 3 20 15 -Bias Nicotine is administered after the conditioning session: CPA Clarke and Fibiger (1987) Bias/unbias CPP with biased procedure; no effect with unbiased procedure Acquas et al (1989) Sprague Bias/unbias CPP with biased procedure; no effect with unbiased procedure Jorenby et al (1990) Holtzman 0.4, 0.8, Bias/unbias CPP with biased procedure, no effect if nicotine is given on preferred side Horan et al (1997) (Biala 2003), subcutaneous. In most studies, nicotine was given immediately before placement in the apparatus, which appears to be most effective for inducing CPP (Fudala et al 1985).…”

Strain differences in response to escapable and inescapable novel environments and their ability to predict amphetamine-induced locomotor activity

“…Compared to F344 rats, Lewis rats show greater conditioned place preference for drugs (Guitart et al 1992;Kosten et al 1994b;Horan et al 1997) and heightened acquisition of drug self-administration (Ambrosio et al 1995;Kosten et al 1997;Suzuki et al 1988). Yet, Lewis rats, compared to F344 rats, have blunted corticosterone levels both basally (Griffin and Whitacre 1991;Dhabhar et al 1993;Ortiz et al 1995) and in response to acute cocaine administration (Simar et al 1996) or acute stress (Sternberg et al 1992;Dhabhar et al 1993).…”