Joyce Besheer1, Sara Faccidomo, Julie J M Grondin, Clyde W Hodge. 1. Bowles Center for Alcohol Studies, Department of Psychiatry, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599, USA. jbesheer@med.unc.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Emerging evidence indicates that Group I metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluR1 and mGluR5) differentially regulates ethanol self-administration in several rodent behavioral models. The purpose of this work was to further characterize involvement of Group I mGluRs in the reinforcing effects of ethanol using a progressive ratio schedule of reinforcement. METHODS: Alcohol-preferring (P) rats were trained to self-administer ethanol (15% v/v) versus water on a concurrent schedule of reinforcement, and the effects of the Group I mGluR antagonists were evaluated on progressive ratio performance. The rats were then trained to self-administer sucrose (0.4% w/v) versus water, and the effects of the antagonists were tested on progressive ratio performance. RESULTS: The mGluR1 antagonist, 3,4-dihydro-2H-pyrano[2,3]b quinolin-7-yl (cis-4-methoxycyclohexyl) methanone (JNJ 16259685; 0 to 1 mg/kg) and the mGluR5 antagonist, 6-methyl-2-(phenylethynyl) pyridine (MPEP; 0 to 10 mg/kg) dose-dependently reduced ethanol break point. In separate locomotor activity assessments, the lowest effective dose of JNJ 16259685 (0.3 mg/kg) produced a motor impairment, whereas the lowest effective dose of MPEP (3 mg/kg) did not. Thus, the reduction in ethanol break point by mGluR1 antagonism was probably a result of a motor impairment. JNJ 16259685 (0.3 mg/kg) and MPEP (10 mg/kg) reduced sucrose break point and produced motor impairments. Thus, the reductions in sucrose break point produced by both Group I antagonists were probably because of nonspecific effects on motor activity. CONCLUSIONS: Together, these results suggest that glutamate activity at mGluR5 regulates motivation to self-administer ethanol.
BACKGROUND: Emerging evidence indicates that Group I metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluR1 and mGluR5) differentially regulates ethanol self-administration in several rodent behavioral models. The purpose of this work was to further characterize involvement of Group I mGluRs in the reinforcing effects of ethanol using a progressive ratio schedule of reinforcement. METHODS:Alcohol-preferring (P) rats were trained to self-administer ethanol (15% v/v) versus water on a concurrent schedule of reinforcement, and the effects of the Group I mGluR antagonists were evaluated on progressive ratio performance. The rats were then trained to self-administer sucrose (0.4% w/v) versus water, and the effects of the antagonists were tested on progressive ratio performance. RESULTS: The mGluR1 antagonist, 3,4-dihydro-2H-pyrano[2,3]b quinolin-7-yl (cis-4-methoxycyclohexyl) methanone (JNJ 16259685; 0 to 1 mg/kg) and the mGluR5 antagonist, 6-methyl-2-(phenylethynyl) pyridine (MPEP; 0 to 10 mg/kg) dose-dependently reduced ethanol break point. In separate locomotor activity assessments, the lowest effective dose of JNJ 16259685 (0.3 mg/kg) produced a motor impairment, whereas the lowest effective dose of MPEP (3 mg/kg) did not. Thus, the reduction in ethanol break point by mGluR1 antagonism was probably a result of a motor impairment. JNJ 16259685 (0.3 mg/kg) and MPEP (10 mg/kg) reduced sucrose break point and produced motor impairments. Thus, the reductions in sucrose break point produced by both Group I antagonists were probably because of nonspecific effects on motor activity. CONCLUSIONS: Together, these results suggest that glutamate activity at mGluR5 regulates motivation to self-administer ethanol.
Authors: P J Kenny; N E Paterson; B Boutrel; S Semenova; A A Harrison; F Gasparini; G F Koob; P D Skoubis; A Markou Journal: Ann N Y Acad Sci Date: 2003-11 Impact factor: 5.691
Authors: James M Murphy; Robert B Stewart; Richard L Bell; Nancy E Badia-Elder; Lucinda G Carr; William J McBride; Lawrence Lumeng; Ting-Kai Li Journal: Behav Genet Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 2.805
Authors: Jeffery J Anderson; Margaret J Bradbury; Darlene R Giracello; Deborah F Chapman; Greg Holtz; Jeffrey Roppe; Chris King; Nicholas D P Cosford; Mark A Varney Journal: Eur J Pharmacol Date: 2003-07-18 Impact factor: 4.432
Authors: Michela Tessari; Maria Pilla; Michela Andreoli; Daniel M Hutcheson; Christian A Heidbreder Journal: Eur J Pharmacol Date: 2004-09-19 Impact factor: 4.432
Authors: Zachary A Rodd; Richard L Bell; Kelly A Kuc; James M Murphy; Lawrence Lumeng; Ting-Kai Li; William J McBride Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2003-06-11 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Carolina L Haass-Koffler; Kimberly Goodyear; Victoria M Long; Harrison H Tran; Antonella Loche; Roberto Cacciaglia; Robert M Swift; Lorenzo Leggio Journal: Eur J Pharm Sci Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: Justin R Yates; Katherine K Rogers; Benjamin T Gunkel; Nicholas A Prior; Mallory N Hughes; Sara M Sharpe; Hunter L Campbell; Anthony B Johnson; Margaret G Keller; Kerry A Breitenstein; Hansen N Shults Journal: Behav Brain Res Date: 2017-01-12 Impact factor: 3.332
Authors: Max E Joffe; Samuel W Centanni; Anel A Jaramillo; Danny G Winder; P Jeffrey Conn Journal: ACS Chem Neurosci Date: 2018-06-08 Impact factor: 4.418
Authors: Richard L Bell; Helen J K Sable; Giancarlo Colombo; Petri Hyytia; Zachary A Rodd; Lawrence Lumeng Journal: Pharmacol Biochem Behav Date: 2012-07-25 Impact factor: 3.533