OBJECTIVE: To determine whether indorenate, a serotonin-receptor agonist, can exert discriminative control over operant responses, to establish the temporal course of discriminative control and to compare its stimulus properties to a (5-HT)IA receptor agonist. [3H]-8-hydroxy-2-(di-N-propylamino) tetralin (8-OH-DPAT). DESIGN: Prospective animal study. ANIMALS: Ten male Wistar rats. INTERVENTIONS: Rats were trained to press either of 2 levers for sucrose solution according to a fixed ratio schedule, which was gradually increased. Rats were given injections of either indorenate or saline solution during discrimination training. Once they had achieved an 83% accuracy rate, rats underwent generalization tests after having received a different dose of indorenate, the training dose of indorenate at various intervals before the test, various doses of 8-OH-DPT, or NAN-190 administered before indorenate or 8-OH-DPAT. OUTCOME MEASURES: Distribution of responses between the 2 levers before the first reinforcer of the session, response rate for all the responses in the session, and a discrimination index that expressed the drug-appropriate responses as a proportion of the total responses. RESULTS: Indorenate administration resulted in discriminative control over operant responses, maintained at fixed ratio 10, at a dose of 10.0 mg/kg (but not 3.0 mg/kg). When the interval between the administration of indorenate and the start of the session was varied, the time course of its cue properties followed that of its described effects on 5-HT turnover. In generalization tests, the discrimination index was a function of the dose of indorenate employed; moreover, administration of 8-OH-DPAT (from 0.1 to 1.0 mg/kg) fully mimicked the stimulus properties of indorenate in a dose-dependent way. The (5-HT)IA antagonist NAN-190 prevented the stimulus generalization from indorenate to 8-OH-DPAT. Also, NAN-190 antagonized the stimulus control of indorenate when administered 45 minutes before the session, but not when administered 105 minutes before the session (i.e., 15 minutes before the administration of indorenate). CONCLUSION: (5-HT)IA receptors are of relevance to the stimulus function of indorenate. However, other receptor subtypes may also be involved. Hence, other agonists and specific antagonists should be studied before definite conclusions are drawn.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether indorenate, a serotonin-receptor agonist, can exert discriminative control over operant responses, to establish the temporal course of discriminative control and to compare its stimulus properties to a (5-HT)IA receptor agonist. [3H]-8-hydroxy-2-(di-N-propylamino) tetralin (8-OH-DPAT). DESIGN: Prospective animal study. ANIMALS: Ten male Wistar rats. INTERVENTIONS:Rats were trained to press either of 2 levers for sucrose solution according to a fixed ratio schedule, which was gradually increased. Rats were given injections of either indorenate or saline solution during discrimination training. Once they had achieved an 83% accuracy rate, rats underwent generalization tests after having received a different dose of indorenate, the training dose of indorenate at various intervals before the test, various doses of 8-OH-DPT, or NAN-190 administered before indorenate or 8-OH-DPAT. OUTCOME MEASURES: Distribution of responses between the 2 levers before the first reinforcer of the session, response rate for all the responses in the session, and a discrimination index that expressed the drug-appropriate responses as a proportion of the total responses. RESULTS:Indorenate administration resulted in discriminative control over operant responses, maintained at fixed ratio 10, at a dose of 10.0 mg/kg (but not 3.0 mg/kg). When the interval between the administration of indorenate and the start of the session was varied, the time course of its cue properties followed that of its described effects on 5-HT turnover. In generalization tests, the discrimination index was a function of the dose of indorenate employed; moreover, administration of 8-OH-DPAT (from 0.1 to 1.0 mg/kg) fully mimicked the stimulus properties of indorenate in a dose-dependent way. The (5-HT)IA antagonist NAN-190 prevented the stimulus generalization from indorenate to 8-OH-DPAT. Also, NAN-190 antagonized the stimulus control of indorenate when administered 45 minutes before the session, but not when administered 105 minutes before the session (i.e., 15 minutes before the administration of indorenate). CONCLUSION: (5-HT)IA receptors are of relevance to the stimulus function of indorenate. However, other receptor subtypes may also be involved. Hence, other agonists and specific antagonists should be studied before definite conclusions are drawn.
Authors: D Hoyer; D E Clarke; J R Fozard; P R Hartig; G R Martin; E J Mylecharane; P R Saxena; P P Humphrey Journal: Pharmacol Rev Date: 1994-06 Impact factor: 25.468
Authors: David N Velazquez-Martinez; Benita Lizeth Pacheco-Gomez; Ana Laura Toscano-Zapien; Maria Almudena Lopez-Guzman; Daniel Velazquez-Lopez Journal: Front Behav Neurosci Date: 2022-02-21 Impact factor: 3.558