BACKGROUND: High levels of impulsivity have been associated with a number of substance abuse disorders including alcohol abuse. Research has not yet revealed whether these high levels predate the development of alcohol abuse. METHODS: The current study examined impulsivity in 15 inbred strains of mice (A/HeJ, AKR/J, BALB/cJ, C3H/HeJ, C57BL/6J, C57L/J, C58/J, CBA/J, DBA/1J, DBA/2J, NZB/B1NJ, PL/J, SJL/J, SWR/J, and 129P3/J) using a Go/No-go task, which was designed to measure a subject's ability to inhibit a behavior. Numerous aspects of response to ethanol and other drugs of abuse have been examined in these strains. RESULTS: There were significant strain differences in the number of responses made during the No-go signal (false alarms) and the extent to which strains responded differentially during the Go and No-go signals (d'). The rate of responding prior to the cue did not differ among strains, although there was a statistically significant correlation between false alarms and precue responding that was not related to basal activity level. Interstrain correlations suggested that false alarms and rate of responding were associated with strain differences in ethanol-related traits from the published literature. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study do support a link between innate level of impulsivity and response to ethanol and are consistent with a genetic basis for some measures of behavioral inhibition.
BACKGROUND: High levels of impulsivity have been associated with a number of substance abuse disorders including alcohol abuse. Research has not yet revealed whether these high levels predate the development of alcohol abuse. METHODS: The current study examined impulsivity in 15 inbred strains of mice (A/HeJ, AKR/J, BALB/cJ, C3H/HeJ, C57BL/6J, C57L/J, C58/J, CBA/J, DBA/1J, DBA/2J, NZB/B1NJ, PL/J, SJL/J, SWR/J, and 129P3/J) using a Go/No-go task, which was designed to measure a subject's ability to inhibit a behavior. Numerous aspects of response to ethanol and other drugs of abuse have been examined in these strains. RESULTS: There were significant strain differences in the number of responses made during the No-go signal (false alarms) and the extent to which strains responded differentially during the Go and No-go signals (d'). The rate of responding prior to the cue did not differ among strains, although there was a statistically significant correlation between false alarms and precue responding that was not related to basal activity level. Interstrain correlations suggested that false alarms and rate of responding were associated with strain differences in ethanol-related traits from the published literature. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study do support a link between innate level of impulsivity and response to ethanol and are consistent with a genetic basis for some measures of behavioral inhibition.
Authors: Luyi Zhou; Miranda L Fisher; Robert D Cole; Thomas J Gould; Vinay Parikh; Pavel I Ortinski; Jill R Turner Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2017-11-07 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Lacey Pflibsen; Katherine A Stang; Michelle D Sconce; Vanessa B Wilson; Rebecca L Hood; Charles K Meshul; Suzanne H Mitchell Journal: J Neurosci Res Date: 2015-08-31 Impact factor: 4.164