Literature DB >> 6387332

Behavioral methods for measuring effects of drugs on learning and memory in animals.

G A Heise.   

Abstract

This review describes methods for measuring effects of drugs on learning and memory in animals, proceeding from relatively simple nonassociative learning (habituation) to classical and instrumental conditioning, and concluding with complex measures for measuring learning and memory repeatedly in the individual animal. Procedures for separating drug effects specific to learning and memory from non-specific effects on activity, motivation, sensory and motor capacity, etc., were emphasized. For each method, selected experimental examples were presented which described the action of drugs on learning and memory, elucidated the behavioral processes involved in the drug effects, or illustrated methodological points. The various procedures used to measure drug effects on learning and memory in animals have yielded a bewildering array of often-contradictory results. Quantitative differences in effectiveness of drugs in the different procedures are common. Drugs (for example, the nootropics) that alter learning or memory in a few procedures may be totally without activity in many others. How are these discrepancies to be interpreted? The apparent inconsistencies in the data can, for the most part, be understood in terms of the nature of learning and memory. "Learning" and "memory" are hypothetical processes presumed to underlie enduring changes in behavior resulting from the organism's interaction with environmental stimuli. Given such a broad definition, the prevalence of inconsistencies in the data is hardly surprising. It is unlikely that the same mechanisms should underlie all of the wide variety of behavioral changes included under the rubrics "learning" or "memory." (For a contrary view, based on consistencies among results obtained in the diverse procedures, see Zornetzer). How, then, should drug effects on learning and memory be identified or measured? The first step, of course, is to rule out those drug effects that do not conform to the definition of learning or memory. This review has described strategies and procedures by which this can be accomplished. However, even when this is done there is no single procedure that can detect drug effects on learning and memory in general, nor, in view of the heterogeneous behaviors involved, is it likely that such a universal procedure will ever be found. Thus, a multi-faceted strategy will be required. Some of the simpler procedures described in this review may be adequate for the initial identification of interesting effects.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Mesh:

Year:  1984        PMID: 6387332     DOI: 10.1002/med.2610040405

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Res Rev        ISSN: 0198-6325            Impact factor:   12.944


  8 in total

Review 1.  Behavioral screening for cognition enhancers: from indiscriminate to valid testing: Part II.

Authors:  M Sarter; J Hagan; P Dudchenko
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 4.530

Review 2.  Behavioral screening for cognition enhancers: from indiscriminate to valid testing: Part I.

Authors:  M Sarter; J Hagan; P Dudchenko
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 4.530

3.  Cholinergic modulation of working memory activity in primate prefrontal cortex.

Authors:  Xin Zhou; Xue-Lian Qi; Kristy Douglas; Kathini Palaninathan; Hyun Sug Kang; Jerry J Buccafusco; David T Blake; Christos Constantinidis
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2011-07-27       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Effects of nootropic drugs in a scopolamine-induced amnesia model in mice.

Authors:  R Verloes; A M Scotto; J Gobert; E Wülfert
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 4.530

5.  The scopolamine-reversal paradigm in rats and monkeys: the importance of computer-assisted operant-conditioning memory tasks for screening drug candidates.

Authors:  Jerry J Buccafusco; Alvin V Terry; Scott J Webster; Daniel Martin; Elizabeth J Hohnadel; Kristy A Bouchard; Samantha E Warner
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2007-07-27       Impact factor: 4.530

6.  Actions of nicotine on the acquisition of an autoshaped lever-touch response in rats.

Authors:  W R Mundy; E T Iwamoto
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 4.530

7.  Fenugreek Seed Powder Nullified Aluminium Chloride Induced Memory Loss, Biochemical Changes, Aβ Burden and Apoptosis via Regulating Akt/GSK3β Signaling Pathway.

Authors:  Asokan Prema; Arokiasamy Justin Thenmozhi; Thamilarasan Manivasagam; Musthafa Mohamed Essa; Mohammed D Akbar; Mohammed Akbar
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-11-28       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Neuroprotective Effects of Higenamine Against the Alzheimer's Disease Via Amelioration of Cognitive Impairment, Aβ Burden, Apoptosis and Regulation of Akt/GSK3β Signaling Pathway.

Authors:  Xiaona Yang; Wanliang Du; Yun Zhang; Hui Wang; Maolin He
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2020-12-11       Impact factor: 2.658

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.