Stressor induced variations of intracranial self-stimulation from the mesocortex in several strains of mice

Zacharko, Robert M.; Gilmore, William S.; MacNeil, Glenda; Kasian, Marilyn; Anisman, Hymie

doi:10.1016/0006-8993(90)91363-l

Cited by 38 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…All of the C57 mice learned to turn the wheel and reached criteria within the first session whereas the successful DBA mice on average took longer to reach the same criteria. Previous studies in inbred or selectively bred mouse or rat strains have generally either not found or not described differences in the rate of learning an operant for brain stimulation reward (Cazala and Cardo 1977; Cazala et al 1974; Cazala and Guenet 1979; Eiler et al 2007; Eiler et al 2006; Eiler et al 2005; Garrigues and Cazala 1983; Ranaldi et al 2001; Woods et al 2003; Zacharko et al 1990). The delay seen in the DBA mice is not the result of a general learning deficit since DBA mice learn to lever press (water training prior to i.v.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Qualitative differences between C57BL/6J and DBA/2J mice in morphine potentiation of brain stimulation reward and intravenous self-administration

Elmer¹,

Pieper

Hamilton

et al. 2009

Psychopharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rationale-The C57BL/6J and DBA/2J mice are the most common genotypes used to identify chromosomal regions and neurochemical mechanisms of interest in opioid addiction. Unfortunately, outside of the oral two-bottle choice procedure, limited and sometimes controversial evidence is available for determining their relative sensitivity to the rewarding effects of morphine.Objectives-The purpose of this study was to utilize classically accepted models of drug abuse liability to determine relative susceptibility to the rewarding effects of morphine.Methods-The ability of morphine or amphetamine to potentiate lateral hypothalamic brain stimulation and intravenous morphine self-administration (across three doses in a Fixed Ratio schedule and highest dose in Progressive Ratio schedules) was investigated in both genotypes Results-In both measures, C57 and DBA mice differed dramatically in their response to morphine. Morphine potentiated rewarding stimulation in the C57 mice, but antagonized it in the DBA mice. Consistent with these findings, intravenous morphine did not serve as a positive reinforcer in DBA mice under conditions that were effective in the C57 mice using a Fixed Ratio schedule and failed to sustain levels of responding sufficient to maintain a constant rate of drug intake under a Progressive Ratio schedule. In contrast, amphetamine potentiated the rewarding effects of brain stimulation similarly in the two genotypes.Conclusions-These findings provide strong evidence that morphine is rewarding in the C57 genotype and not in the DBA genotype. Understanding their relative susceptibility is important given the prominence of these genotypes in candidate gene identification and gene mapping.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Qualitative differences between C57BL/6J and DBA/2J mice in morphine potentiation of brain stimulation reward and intravenous self-administration

Elmer¹,

Pieper

Hamilton

et al. 2009

Psychopharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Prior studies have compared rodent strains or selected lines for effects on responding for electrical brain stimulation (BSR). Mouse strain differences have been found for amphetamine (Cazala 1976), cocaine (Fish et al 2010), morphine (Elmer et al 2010), alcohol (Fish et al 2010) and the suppressive effects of footshock stress (Zacharko et al 1990). Rat strain differences have been less robust (Lepore et al 1996; Matthews et al 1996; Ranaldi et al 2001).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intracranial self-stimulation in FAST and SLOW mice: effects of alcohol and cocaine

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rationale Sensitivity to the stimulant and rewarding effects of alcohol may be genetically-correlated traits that predispose individuals to developing an alcohol use disorder. Objective To examine the effects of alcohol and cocaine on intracranial self-stimulation (ICSS) in FAST and SLOW mice, which were selectively bred for extremes in alcohol stimulation. Methods Male FAST and SLOW mice were conditioned to respond for reinforcement by direct electrical stimulation of the medial forebrain bundle (i.e. brain stimulation-reward or BSR). ICSS responses were determined immediately before and after oral gavage with water or alcohol (0.3 – 2.4 g/kg) or intraperitoneal injection with saline or cocaine (1.0 – 30.0 mg/kg). In separate FAST and SLOW mice, the locomotor effects of these treatments were measured in activity chambers. Results Alcohol dose-dependently lowered the threshold for self-stimulation (θ0) and the frequency that maintained 50% of maximal responding (EF50) in FAST mice but did not significantly affect these parameters in SLOW mice. The largest effects of alcohol were after the 1.7 and 2.4 g/kg doses and were about 40% compared to water injection. Alcohol did not affect MAX response rates, but dose-dependently stimulated locomotor activity in FAST mice. Cocaine lowered thresholds equally in FAST and SLOW mice, although cocaine- stimulated locomotor activity was higher in the FAST than in the SLOW mice. Conclusions Selective breeding for alcohol locomotor stimulation also renders the mice more sensitive to the effects of alcohol, but not cocaine, on ICSS.

show abstract

“…In the aforementioned ICSS studies by Zacharko et al (1987Zacharko et al ( , 1990) ICSS responding was also studied in DBA/2J and BALB/cByJ strains. Although resistant to the development of LH escape deficits, DBA/2J responded to acute inescapable shock with decreased ICSS responding (Zacharko et al 1987, and further DBA/2J responded to acute and chronic inescapable shock and chronic severe stress with reduced intake of a preferred liquid (Griffiths et al 1992).…”

Section: Stress-induced Anhedonia Grooming Deficits and Aggressionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It has been proposed that this general paucity may be due in part to a lack of standardized protocol for mice . Strain comparison investigating the influence of inescapable shock on hedonic measures, including ICSS responding and intake of preferred food substrates, were conducted in the late 1980s and early 1990s by the group headed by Hymie Anisman in Ottawa, Canada (for example, Zacharko et al 1987Zacharko et al , 1990Griffiths et al 1992). More recently, the Belzung group in Tours, France, has examined strain variation in intake of preferred food and fluid substrates in response to unpredictable CMS Belzung 2004, 2005;Pothion et al 2004), and integrated the measurement of other, relatively sensitive, response variables such as deterioration in fur state (Mineur et al 2003;Belzung 2004, 2005;Pothion et al 2004), grooming performance when sprayed with a sticky solution (10% sucrose) (Ducottet and Belzung 2004) and aggressive tendency (Mineur et al 2003).…”

Section: Baseline Studies In Animal Tests Of Antidepressant Activitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Feeling Strained? Influence of Genetic Background on Depression-Related Behavior in Mice: A Review

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Depression is a growing pandemic in developed societies. The use of inbred mouse strains in pre-clinical psychiatric research has proven to be a valuable resource. Firstly, they provide the background for genetic manipulations that aid in the discovery of molecular pathways that may be involved in major depression. Further, inbred mouse strains are also being used in the determination of genetic and environmental influences that may pre-dispose or trigger depression-related behavior. This review aims to highlight the utility of inbred mouse strains in depression research, while providing an overview of the current state of research into behavioral differences between strains in paradigms commonly used in the field. Neurochemical differences that may underlie strain differences are examined, and some caveats and cautions associated with the use of inbred strains are highlighted.

show abstract

Stressor induced variations of intracranial self-stimulation from the mesocortex in several strains of mice

Cited by 38 publications

References 15 publications

Qualitative differences between C57BL/6J and DBA/2J mice in morphine potentiation of brain stimulation reward and intravenous self-administration

Qualitative differences between C57BL/6J and DBA/2J mice in morphine potentiation of brain stimulation reward and intravenous self-administration

Intracranial self-stimulation in FAST and SLOW mice: effects of alcohol and cocaine

Feeling Strained? Influence of Genetic Background on Depression-Related Behavior in Mice: A Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About