Brittney R Lins1, Anthony G Phillips2, John G Howland3. 1. Department of Physiology, University of Saskatchewan, GB33, Health Sciences Building, 107 Wiggins Rd, Saskatoon, SK, Canada, S7N 5E5. 2. Department of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada, V6T 2A1. 3. Department of Physiology, University of Saskatchewan, GB33, Health Sciences Building, 107 Wiggins Rd, Saskatoon, SK, Canada, S7N 5E5. john.howland@usask.ca.
Abstract
RATIONALE: New pharmacological treatments for the cognitive deficits in schizophrenia are needed. Tetrahydroprotoberberines, such as govadine, are one class of compounds with dopaminergic activities that may be useful in treating some aspects of the cognitive symptoms of the disorder. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present studies was to test the effects of the D- and L-enantiomers of govadine on the impairment in a paired-associate learning (PAL) task produced by acute MK-801 in rats. We also assessed effects of the typical antipsychotic haloperidol as a comparator compound. METHODS: MK-801 (0.05, 0.1, 0.15, and 0.2 mg/kg), D- and L-govadine (0.3, 1.0, and 3.0 mg/kg), and haloperidol (0.05, 0.1, and 0.25 mg/kg) were administered acutely to rats well trained on the PAL task in touchscreen-equipped operant conditioning chambers. RESULTS: Acute MK-801 impaired performance of PAL in a dose-dependent manner by reducing accuracy and increasing correction trials. L-Govadine (1.0 mg/kg), but not D-govadine, blocked the disruptive effects of MK-801 (0.15 mg/kg) on PAL. Haloperidol failed to affect the MK-801-induced disruption of PAL. Higher doses of L-govadine and haloperidol dramatically impaired performance of the task which confounded interpretation of cognitive outcomes. CONCLUSION: L-Govadine appears unique in its ability to improve performance of the MK-801-induced impairment in the PAL task. This behavioral effect may relate the ability of L-govadine to antagonize dopamine D2 receptors while also promoting dopamine efflux. Future research should further characterize the role of the dopamine system in the rodent PAL task to elucidate the mechanisms of its pro-cognitive effects.
RATIONALE: New pharmacological treatments for the cognitive deficits in schizophrenia are needed. Tetrahydroprotoberberines, such as govadine, are one class of compounds with dopaminergic activities that may be useful in treating some aspects of the cognitive symptoms of the disorder. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present studies was to test the effects of the D- and L-enantiomers of govadine on the impairment in a paired-associate learning (PAL) task produced by acute MK-801 in rats. We also assessed effects of the typical antipsychotic haloperidol as a comparator compound. METHODS:MK-801 (0.05, 0.1, 0.15, and 0.2 mg/kg), D- and L-govadine (0.3, 1.0, and 3.0 mg/kg), and haloperidol (0.05, 0.1, and 0.25 mg/kg) were administered acutely to rats well trained on the PAL task in touchscreen-equipped operant conditioning chambers. RESULTS: Acute MK-801 impaired performance of PAL in a dose-dependent manner by reducing accuracy and increasing correction trials. L-Govadine (1.0 mg/kg), but not D-govadine, blocked the disruptive effects of MK-801 (0.15 mg/kg) on PAL. Haloperidol failed to affect the MK-801-induced disruption of PAL. Higher doses of L-govadine and haloperidol dramatically impaired performance of the task which confounded interpretation of cognitive outcomes. CONCLUSION:L-Govadine appears unique in its ability to improve performance of the MK-801-induced impairment in the PAL task. This behavioral effect may relate the ability of L-govadine to antagonize dopamine D2 receptors while also promoting dopamine efflux. Future research should further characterize the role of the dopamine system in the rodent PAL task to elucidate the mechanisms of its pro-cognitive effects.
Authors: Keith H Nuechterlein; Deanna M Barch; James M Gold; Terry E Goldberg; Michael F Green; Robert K Heaton Journal: Schizophr Res Date: 2004-12-15 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Alan S Brown; Sophia Vinogradov; William S Kremen; John H Poole; Raymond F Deicken; Justin D Penner; Ian W McKeague; Anna Kochetkova; David Kern; Catherine A Schaefer Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2009-04-15 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Alexa E Horner; Christopher J Heath; Martha Hvoslef-Eide; Brianne A Kent; Chi Hun Kim; Simon R O Nilsson; Johan Alsiö; Charlotte A Oomen; Andrew Holmes; Lisa M Saksida; Timothy J Bussey Journal: Nat Protoc Date: 2013-09-19 Impact factor: 13.491
Authors: Andrew J Roebuck; Wendie N Marks; Max C Liu; Nimra B Tahir; Nadine K Zabder; Terrance P Snutch; John G Howland Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2018-09-24 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Jessica L Hurtubise; Wendie N Marks; Don A Davies; Jillian K Catton; Glen B Baker; John G Howland Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2016-10-10 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Samantha M Smith; Sabrina Zequeira; Meena Ravi; Sarah A Johnson; Andriena M Hampton; Aleyna M Ross; Wonn Pyon; Andrew P Maurer; Jennifer L Bizon; Sara N Burke Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2021-10-02 Impact factor: 5.133
Authors: Sudharshan Madapa; Satishkumar Gadhiya; Thomas Kurtzman; Ian L Alberts; Steven Ramsey; Maarten Reith; Wayne W Harding Journal: Eur J Med Chem Date: 2016-09-14 Impact factor: 6.514
Authors: Ian R Winship; Serdar M Dursun; Glen B Baker; Priscila A Balista; Ludmyla Kandratavicius; Joao Paulo Maia-de-Oliveira; Jaime Hallak; John G Howland Journal: Can J Psychiatry Date: 2018-05-09 Impact factor: 4.356
Authors: Michael D Anderson; John W Paylor; Gavin A Scott; Quentin Greba; Ian R Winship; John G Howland Journal: Learn Mem Date: 2020-05-15 Impact factor: 2.460
Authors: Gavin A Scott; Dylan J Terstege; Andrew J Roebuck; Kelsea A Gorzo; Alex P Vu; John G Howland; Jonathan R Epp Journal: Mol Brain Date: 2021-06-26 Impact factor: 4.041