Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Rationale: The role played by D(1)-like receptors in amphetamine-induced behavioral sensitization has been examined using both the D(1)-like receptor antagonist, SCH 23390, and the D(1A) receptor knockout mouse (i.e. D(1A)-deficient mice). Studies using these two approaches have provided conflicting evidence about the importance of D(1)-like receptors for amphetamine-induced behavioral sensitization.
Objective: The purpose of the present study was to determine: (a) whether D(1A)-deficient mice exhibit amphetamine-induced locomotor sensitization after 3 and 17 drug abstinence days, and (b) whether SCH 23390, which binds to both D(1A) and D(1B) receptor subtypes, blocks development of amphetamine sensitization in wild-type and D(1A)-deficient mice.
Methods: In the first experiment, adult wild-type and D(1A)-deficient mice were injected with amphetamine (0, 1, 2, 4, or 8 mg/kg, IP) for 7 consecutive days. In the second experiment, wild-type and D(1A)-deficient mice were pretreated with SCH 23390 (0, 0.15, or 0.5 mg/kg, IP) 30 min prior to being injected with amphetamine (0 or 8 mg/kg, IP). After each daily amphetamine injection, mice were placed in activity chambers where distance traveled (i.e. horizontal locomotor activity) was measured for 60 min. On the test days, which occurred after 3 or 17 drug abstinence days, mice were injected with 1 mg/kg amphetamine and locomotion was measured for 120 min.
Results: Both wild-type and D(1A)-deficient mice exhibited amphetamine-induced locomotor sensitization. Pretreatment with 0.5 mg/kg SCH 23390 blocked the development of locomotor sensitization in wild-type mice, but did not alter the sensitized responding of D(1A)-deficient mice.
Conclusions: It appears that D(1)-like receptors are necessary for the development of amphetamine sensitization in wild-type mice, while neither the D(1A) nor D(1B) receptor subtypes are necessary for the amphetamine-induced locomotor sensitization of D(1A)-deficient mice. A possible explanation for these conflicting results is that D(1A)-deficient mice may have a compensatory mechanism (not involving D(1B) receptors) that allows them to exhibit amphetamine-induced behavioral sensitization in the absence of the D(1A) receptor.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00213-001-0936-7 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!