J A Vivian1, J D Higley, M Linnoila, J H Woods. 1. Department of Pharmacology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor 48109-0632, USA. jvivian@umich.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous research has revealed that orally administered ethanol serves as a reinforcer in nonhuman primates. The purposes of the present study were to examine the relationship between ethanol preferences and intakes in two distinct self-administration contexts and to reveal some of the behavioral and neurochemical correlates of oral ethanol self-administration in monkeys. METHODS: Three cohorts of 13 to 29 rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) were socially housed and given daily, 1-hr, one-spout access to an ethanol solution (8.4%, w/v) sweetened with aspartame. Twelve of these monkeys were subsequently selected, individually housed, and given daily, 2-hr, two-spout access to a range of ethanol concentrations (0.25-16%, w/v) concurrently with water. RESULTS: These monkeys (National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism group) showed a marked preference for ethanol (0.5-4%, w/v) over water, and ethanol preferences were 3-fold greater than those of a second group of 12 monkeys (University of Michigan group) purchased from a commercial vendor. Ethanol consumption was consistent across the self-administration paradigms. Monkeys that consumed large quantities of ethanol under the one-spout, social-housing conditions continued to drink large quantities of ethanol under the two-spout, individual-housing conditions (r = 0.86). An association between ethanol preferences and intakes was also demonstrated. Monkeys with the greatest preferences for ethanol over water under the two-spout choice conditions consumed the largest quantities of ethanol (r = 0.82). Finally, cerebrospinal fluid 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid concentrations were inversely related to ethanol preference but not to ethanol intake. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that ethanol consumption is stable across contexts and is positively correlated with the preference for ethanol over water.
BACKGROUND: Previous research has revealed that orally administered ethanol serves as a reinforcer in nonhuman primates. The purposes of the present study were to examine the relationship between ethanol preferences and intakes in two distinct self-administration contexts and to reveal some of the behavioral and neurochemical correlates of oral ethanol self-administration in monkeys. METHODS: Three cohorts of 13 to 29 rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) were socially housed and given daily, 1-hr, one-spout access to an ethanol solution (8.4%, w/v) sweetened with aspartame. Twelve of these monkeys were subsequently selected, individually housed, and given daily, 2-hr, two-spout access to a range of ethanol concentrations (0.25-16%, w/v) concurrently with water. RESULTS: These monkeys (National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism group) showed a marked preference for ethanol (0.5-4%, w/v) over water, and ethanol preferences were 3-fold greater than those of a second group of 12 monkeys (University of Michigan group) purchased from a commercial vendor. Ethanol consumption was consistent across the self-administration paradigms. Monkeys that consumed large quantities of ethanol under the one-spout, social-housing conditions continued to drink large quantities of ethanol under the two-spout, individual-housing conditions (r = 0.86). An association between ethanol preferences and intakes was also demonstrated. Monkeys with the greatest preferences for ethanol over water under the two-spout choice conditions consumed the largest quantities of ethanol (r = 0.82). Finally, cerebrospinal fluid 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid concentrations were inversely related to ethanol preference but not to ethanol intake. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that ethanol consumption is stable across contexts and is positively correlated with the preference for ethanol over water.
Authors: Simon N Katner; Claudia T Flynn; Stefani N Von Huben; Amber J Kirsten; Sophia A Davis; Christopher C Lay; Maury Cole; Amanda J Roberts; Howard S Fox; Michael A Taffe Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2004-06 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Kimberly N Huggins; Tiffany A Mathews; Jason L Locke; Kendall T Szeliga; David P Friedman; Allyson J Bennett; Sara R Jones Journal: Alcohol Date: 2012-03-24 Impact factor: 2.405
Authors: Daniela Rüedi-Bettschen; James K Rowlett; Sundari Rallapalli; Terry Clayton; James M Cook; Donna M Platt Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2012-11-05 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Simon N Katner; Stefani N Von Huben; Sophia A Davis; Christopher C Lay; Rebecca D Crean; Amanda J Roberts; Howard S Fox; Michael A Taffe Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2007-07-12 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Gloria L Fawcett; Muthuswamy Raveendran; David Rio Deiros; David Chen; Fuli Yu; Ronald Alan Harris; Yanru Ren; Donna M Muzny; Jeffrey G Reid; David A Wheeler; Kimberly C Worley; Steven E Shelton; Ned H Kalin; Aleksandar Milosavljevic; Richard Gibbs; Jeffrey Rogers Journal: BMC Genomics Date: 2011-06-13 Impact factor: 3.969
Authors: Elizabeth K Wood; Maribeth Champoux; Stephen G Lindell; Christina S Barr; Stephen J Suomi; J Dee Higley Journal: Am J Primatol Date: 2019-09-02 Impact factor: 3.014