J D Caleb Browne1, Ashlie D Soko, Paul J Fletcher. 1. Department of Psychology, University of Toronto, 100 St. George Street, Toronto, ON, M5S 3G3, Canada, caleb.browne@mail.utoronto.ca.
Abstract
RATIONALE: Characterization of responding for conditioned reinforcement in mice is important to implement genetic tools in examining the neurobiological mechanisms underlying reward-related learning and incentive motivation. METHODS: Inbred C57BL/6 mice, outbred CD-1 mice, and outbred Sprague-Dawley rats underwent Pavlovian conditioning in which a conditioned stimulus (CS) was paired with saccharin. Subsequently, subjects were allowed to respond for that CS in tests of responding for conditioned reinforcement. Experiments measured the effects of methylphenidate (MPH) and amphetamine (AMPH) on lever pressing for conditioned reinforcement in mice and rats. We further examined the stability of responding for conditioned reinforcement in mice after repeated testing and the extinction of this behaviour following omission of the reinforcer. We also determined whether the CS exhibited reinforcing properties if it was not paired with saccharin. RESULTS: C57BL/6 and CD-1 mice learned to respond for a conditioned reinforcer similarly to rats, and the behaviour was stable over time. MPH increased responding in CD-1 mice and rats, but not in C57BL/6 mice. AMPH only increased responding in rats. Responding was reduced following omission of the conditioned reinforcer, and responding was only established when the CS was paired with saccharin. CONCLUSIONS: These experiments characterize a conditioned reinforcement test which produces stable responding in two different mouse backgrounds. These findings also show that dopaminergic psychomotor stimulants can differently affect rats and mice in tests of responding for conditioned reinforcement.
RATIONALE: Characterization of responding for conditioned reinforcement in mice is important to implement genetic tools in examining the neurobiological mechanisms underlying reward-related learning and incentive motivation. METHODS: Inbred C57BL/6 mice, outbred CD-1mice, and outbred Sprague-Dawley rats underwent Pavlovian conditioning in which a conditioned stimulus (CS) was paired with saccharin. Subsequently, subjects were allowed to respond for that CS in tests of responding for conditioned reinforcement. Experiments measured the effects of methylphenidate (MPH) and amphetamine (AMPH) on lever pressing for conditioned reinforcement in mice and rats. We further examined the stability of responding for conditioned reinforcement in mice after repeated testing and the extinction of this behaviour following omission of the reinforcer. We also determined whether the CS exhibited reinforcing properties if it was not paired with saccharin. RESULTS: C57BL/6 and CD-1mice learned to respond for a conditioned reinforcer similarly to rats, and the behaviour was stable over time. MPH increased responding in CD-1mice and rats, but not in C57BL/6 mice. AMPH only increased responding in rats. Responding was reduced following omission of the conditioned reinforcer, and responding was only established when the CS was paired with saccharin. CONCLUSIONS: These experiments characterize a conditioned reinforcement test which produces stable responding in two different mouse backgrounds. These findings also show that dopaminergic psychomotor stimulants can differently affect rats and mice in tests of responding for conditioned reinforcement.
Authors: Nora D Volkow; Gene-Jack Wang; Frank Telang; Joanna S Fowler; Jean Logan; Anna-Rose Childress; Millard Jayne; Yeming Ma; Christopher Wong Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2006-06-14 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: Jared W Young; J David Jentsch; Timothy J Bussey; Tanya L Wallace; Daniel M Hutcheson Journal: Neurosci Biobehav Rev Date: 2012-10-12 Impact factor: 8.989
Authors: Emma S J Robinson; Dawn M Eagle; Adam C Mar; Andrea Bari; Gargi Banerjee; Xiaosu Jiang; Jeffrey W Dalley; Trevor W Robbins Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2007-07-18 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Alexandra M Stafford; Shawn M Anderson; Keith L Shelton; Darlene H Brunzell Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2015-08-14 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Theodora Duka; Claire I Dixon; Leanne Trick; Hans S Crombag; Sarah L King; David N Stephens Journal: Front Behav Neurosci Date: 2015-11-18 Impact factor: 3.558
Authors: Maurício dos Santos Pereira; Matheus Figueiredo Sathler; Thais da Rosa Valli; Richard Souza Marques; Ana Lucia Marques Ventura; Ney Ronner Peccinalli; Mabel Carneiro Fraga; Alex C Manhães; Regina Kubrusly Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-10-28 Impact factor: 3.240