Prior drug experience and effects of amphetamine on schedule controlled behavior

Food deprived rats were trained to lever press for food pellets on a fixed ratio 40 schedule of reinforcement. Following 18 days of training, rats received d-amphetamine IP (1.0 mg/kg) as a drug control. Three days later, half of the animals were given d-amphetamine and half were given NaCl for six days. Tolerance to the disruptive effects of d-amphetamine on FR responding was not noted in the drugged group. Both groups received 14 more daily sessions with NaCl followed by 12 additional days of drug. Rats with previous drug experience exhibited tolerance in 6 days, while the other group required 12 days. In a second study, rats were trained to respond on an unsignalled continuous avoidance schedule for 8–10 weeks. Two groups of rats were given 7 daily drug sessions in which d-amphetamine (1.0 mg/kg) was administered IP. Each drug session was followed by 2 daily NaCl control sessions. In the first 3 drug sessions of one group, d-amphetamine was injected IP 30 min after the end of the session. All other injections were given immediately before placement into the operant chamber. During the first session in which the drug was injected before placement into the chamber, response increases were significantly higher in rats with drug experience outside the behavioral situation than in drug naive subjects. These studies emphasize the importance of prior drug exposure when investigating behavioral effects of drugs.     

Some behavioral effects of repeated d-amphetamine administrations

Effects of daily administrations of d-amphetamine were studied on key peck responses of pigeons maintained under a multiple fixed-interval 2-min, fixed-ratio 30-responseschedule. Under the fixed-interval schedule, a pause was followed by a transition to increasing rates of responding until food presentation. Under the fixed-ratio schedule, higher sustained rates of responding were maintained. Low to intermediate doses (0.3-1.0 mg/kg) of d-amphetamine changed the temporal patterns and occasionally increased rates of responding under the fixed-interval schedule. Higher doses decreased rates of responding under bothschedules. With daily injections of 1.0 mg/kg d-amphetamine prior to experimental sessions, the effects of this dose on rates and patterns of responding were attenuated, and d-anphetamine dose-effect curves were shifted to the right, primarily under the fixed-ratio schedule. Similar results were obtained with daily presession injections of 5.6 mg/kg d-amphetamine in a second group of pigeons, except that rates of responding under both schedules were decreased by this daily dose, and did not return completely to control values with repeated injections. In a third group of pigeons, 1.0 mg/kg d-amphetamine administered daily, after experimental sessions, did not alter dose-effect functions for d-amphetamine. In a second experiment, pigeons were trained to peck one response key when given 1.0 mg/kg d-amphetamine and a different key when given presession water injections. Increasing doses of d-amphetamine produced incresing percentages of d-amphetamine-key responses. Repeated administration of 5.6 mg/kg d-amphetamine shifted these dose-effect functions to the right one-half log unit. Results suggested that decreases in reinforcement frequency are not a necessary condition for the development of behavioral tolerance to d-amphetamine.     

The effect of d-amphetamine on operant behaviour maintained under variable-interval schedules of reinforcement

Dose-response curves were obtained for the effects of d-amphetamine sulphate (0.1–3.2 mg/kg) on the operant performance of rats in variable-interval 4-min and variableinterval 20-min schedules of reinforcement. Response rates maintained under variable-interval 4-min were suppressed in a dose-dependent manner. Response rates maintained under variable-interval 20-min schedules tended to be elevated by low doses and suppressed by higher doses. The degree of response rate suppression was greater in the case of the variable-interval 4-min schedule. The results are consistent with the previously reported effect of d-amphetamine on the values of the two constants of Herrnstein's (1970) equation: the drug reduces the reinforcement frequency needed to maintain the half-maximum response rates (K _h) and lowers the maximum response rate (R _max) (Bradshaw et al. 1981 b). It is suggested that the effects of d-amphetamine on operant performance may involve two processes: an enhancement of motivation and a reduction of the capacity to respond.     

Shifting of the d-amphetamine dose-response curve in rats with frontal cortical ablations

Rats trained to bar-press on a FI 15 sec schedule for water reinforcement were administered various doses of d-amphetamine (0.25–4.0 mg/kg) both before and 6–8 weeks after bilateral ablation of frontal cortex. Preoperatively, low doses (e.g. 0.25–0.5 mg/kg) of (d-amphetamine increased responding and high doses (e.g. 2.0–4.0 mg/kg) of d-amphetamine depressed responding. Postoperatively, frontal rats showed larger facilitatory effects in response to low doses of d-amphet-amine but lesser depressant effects in response to high doses of d-amphetamine; the whole dose-response curve was generally shifted higher by the frontal lesions. These results indicate that frontal lesions differentially influence mechanisms mediating two different actions of d-amphetamine.This research was supported by NIMH grant MH21156 and NIMH Research Scientist Development Award (Type 2) DA70082 to S. D. Glick.     

Amphetamine withdrawal: Effects on threshold of intracranial reinforcement

In order to determine whether alterations in sensitivity to rewarding stimuli accompany the biochemical and behavioral changes induced by chronic amphetamine treatment and withdrawal, we explored the effects of chronic administration and withdrawal of d-amphetamine on thresholds of intracranial reinforcement in the rat. Rats were injected with d-amphetamine sulfate according to a chronic, escalating dose schedule. Marked decreases in threshold of intracranial reinforcement were observed immediately (0–1 h) following the last injection of d-amphetamine. In contrast, all animals showed marked increases in thresholds of intracranial reinforcement 24–48 h after the last injection of d-amphetamine. These findings were discussed in relation to amphetamine-induced and naturally occurring depressions in man.     

Conditioned suppression of an operant response using d-amphetamine as the conditioned stimulus

The use of a drug state as a conditioned stimulus (CS) in a classical conditioning paradigm was investigated. Suppression of a single-lever foodreinforced response (variable-interval 60s) served as an index of a classically conditioned response (conditioned suppression). d-Amphetamine (0.8 mg/kg) injections were paired with a series of inescapable shocks. Following drug-shock pairing, the effects of d-amphetamine on operant response totals was compared to effects obtained in control subjects which had received unpaired d-amphetamine and shock exposures. d-Amphetamine administered during daily operant sessions unaccompanied by shock was an effective CS for conditioned suppression of the operant response. Administration of cocaine hydrochloride (7.5 mg/kg) also produced a decrease in total responses, suggesting stimulus generalization from the shock-paired drug to a novel drug.This paper reports a portion of a dissertation project in partial fulfillment of requirements for the Ph. D. degree, Department of Psychology, University of Houston, 1975     

Pre-exposure of rats to amphetamine sensitizes self-administration of this drug under a progressive ratio schedule

 Two groups of male rats were tested to determine whether pre-exposure to d-amphetamine would enhance the motivation to self-administer the drug under a progressive ratio schedule of reinforcement. In the first phase of the experiment, one group of rats received d-amphetamine (2 mg/kg IP), while a second group received saline on alternate days for a total of ten injections. Following a 21-day drug withdrawal period, behavioral sensitization was confirmed by a significant increase in amphetamine-induced stereotypy in the d-amphetamine-pretreated group, relative to the saline-pretreated group. In the second phase of the study, all rats were implanted with chronic jugular catheters and trained to self-administer d-amphetamine (0.2 mg/kg per infusion) under a fixed-ratio schedule of reinforcement. The progressive ratio paradigm was then imposed for 7 consecutive days; d-amphetamine-pretreated rats attained significantly higher break points than saline-pretreated animals. These data suggest that pre-exposure to d-amphetamine may enhance the motivation to self-administer this drug. Received: 16 July 1997 / Final version: 22 October 1997     

Attenuation by pimozide of the suppressant effect of d-amphetamine on operant behaviour

The interaction between pimozide (a selective D₂-dopamine receptor antagonist) and d-amphetamine on the operant performance of rats maintained under variable-interval schedules of positive reinforcement was examined. In Experiment 1, eight rats responded under variable-interval 30-s and variable-interval 300-s. Pimozide (0.0625, 0.125, 0.25, 0.5 mg/kg) suppressed performance maintained under both schedules in a dose-dependent manner, the degrees of suppression being equivalent in the two schedules. In Experiment 2, 12 rats responded under the same schedules. d-Amphetamine (0.1–3.2 mg/kg) suppressed performance under both schedules, the degree of suppression being somewhat greater in the case of variable-interval 30-s. Pre-treatment with pimozide (0.0625, 0.125 mg/kg) significantly attenuated the suppressant effect of d-amphetamine under both schedules. It is suggested that D₂-dopamine receptors may be involved in mediating the suppressant effect of d-amphetamine on operant behaviour.     

Tolerance to antinociceptive effects of morphine without tolerance to its effects on schedule-controlled behavior

The development of tolerance to behavioral effects of morphine was investigated in rats that responded on a two-lever, multiple-trial, multiple differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate fixed-ratio (mult DRL FR) schedule of food presentation. Stable performances were maintained when sessions were conducted just twice per week. The effects of cumulative doses of morphine (1.0–8.0 mg/kg) or chlordiazepoxide (CDP; 4.0–32.0 mg/kg) were evaluated once per week; saline injections were given in the intervening sessions. The effects of saline and morphine on nociception were also evaluated in hot-plate tests conducted on the same subjects 15 min after selected operant sessions. Initially, morphine produced dose-related decreases in response rates and reinforcement rates in the DRL and FR components as well as significant increases in hot-plate response latencies. Following weekly administration of morphine (1.0–8.0 mg/kg) for 10 weeks, there was little or no tolerance to its effects on operant behavior. In contrast, complete tolerance developed to the antinociceptive effects of morphine. These results suggest that tolerance to various behavioral effects of morphine may be dissociated, and that the loss of reinforcement may be insufficient by itself to produce tolerance to effects of morphine on operant behavior. Additionally, whereas CDP initially produced only dose-related decreases in DRL and FR response rates, following weekly morphine the smaller doses of CDP (4.0–16.0 mg/kg) produced increases in response rates. Finally, the effects of cumulative doses of morphine did not differ significantly from the effects of noncumulative doses of the drug.     

Effects of drug-state change on discrimination performance

A single dose of d-amphetamine (0.25, 0.50, or 1.00 mg/kg), administered in 5 successive sessions, did not seriously impede the discrimination performance of male Holtzman rats under cued reinforcement conditions. A 2.00 mg/kg dose, however, produced a total cessation of operant behavior. In 2 postdrug (saline) sessions, groups previously treated with 0.50 or 1.00 mg/kg demonstrated an initial decrement and subsequent recovery in performance. A second experiment demonstrated that rats administered either saline or 0.50 mg/kg d-amphetamine for 5 successive sessions showed a decrement and subsequent recovery in performance when switched to the opposite treatment condition for the next 2 sessions. These data may be explained in terms of a change in drug state.     

Can the DRL 72s schedule selectively reveal antidepressant drug activity?

The effects of three antidepressants, desipramine (2.5–20 mg/kg) tranylcypromine (0.63–2.5 mg/kg) mianserin (1.25–10 mg/kg) and three non-antidepressants, chlordiazepoxide (CDP; 1.25–10 mg/kg) haloperidol (0.02–0.16 mg/kg)d-amphetamine (0.31–1.25 mg/kg) were evaluated in rats responding for water reinforcement under a DRL 72s schedule. The antidepressants all produced dose-related decreases in overall response rates, but no significant changes in reinforcement frequency. In contrast, the anxiolytic CDP did increase the number of reinforcers obtained. Haloperidol decreased both reinforcers and responses whilstd-amphetamine stimulated responding, thereby decreasing reinforcement frequency. An analysis of the modes of inter-response times (IRTs) revealed no significant shifts in the peaks of the IRT distributions for most of the drugs tested. Amphetamine, however, (0.31 and 0.63 mg/kg) decreased the modal values in correspondence with the shift to the left of the peak of responding caused by this compound. These results are discussed in the context of the use of the DRL 72s procedure as a screening test for antidepressant drugs.     

d-amphetamine and adjunctive drinking in rats

In the first experiment four food-deprived rats developed high levels of adjunctive water drinking during daily sessions of intermittent food pellet delivery. When the water was removed and a solution of d-amphetamine sulfate (0.01 mg/ml) put in its place, adjunctive drinking was disrupted towards the end of each session although the rats ingested doses of approximately 0.5 mg/kg daily for over 40 sessions. Consumption of the d-amphetamine solution was increased by injections of several doses of -methyl-p-tyrosine (AMPT). In a second experiment injections of d-amphetamine (0.25, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0 mg/kg) were found to reduce adjunctive water consumption in six rats. It was also found that the actions of the two highest doses of d-amphetamine were reduced by pretreatment with a dose of AMPT (100 mg/kg), which itself slightly reduced levels of drinking. These results suggest that, although adjunctive drinking may be a useful technique for inducing rats to self-administer d-amphetamine, the amount of drug consumed is limited by a direct action of the drug on drinking.     

Interaction between antidepressants andd-amphetamine on variable-interval performance

Four experiments were carried out investigating the interactions between some antidepressant drugs (imipramine, desipramine, fluvoxamine, trazodone (4 and 8 mg/kg) andd-amphetamine (0.1–3.2 mg/kg) on operant behaviour maintained under a variable-interval 80-s schedule of sucrose reinforcement; each experiment employed 12 rats.d-Amphetamine exerted a dose-related suppressant effect on response rate. Imipramine and desipramine given alone had no effect on response rate, whereas fluvoxamine (both doses) and the higher dose of trazodone produced significant increases in response rate. Pretreatment with imipramine, desipramine or fluvoxamine significantly potentiated the suppressant effect ofd-amphetamine on responding; pretreatment with trazodone had no significant effect. The potentiating effect of imipramine and desipramine may be related to their well known uptake blocking actions. The fact that fluvoxamine, a selective inhibitor of 5-hydroxytryptamine (5HT) uptake, also potentiated the effect ofd-amphetamine suggests that the suppressant effect ofd-amphetamine on operant behaviour may involve 5HT as well as catecholamine release. The lack of effect of trazodone may reflect its failure to influence uptake mechanisms. On the basis of a formal model couched in terms of Herrnstein's (1970) equation, it is suggested that imipramine, desipramine and fluvoxamine may have enhancedd-amphetamine's ability to reduce response capacity; it is suggested that the data do not provide evidence for an interaction between the antidepressants and the putative motivation-enhancing effect ofd-amphetamine.     

A progressive ratio schedule of self-stimulation testing in rats reveals profound augmentation of<Emphasis Type="Italic"> d</Emphasis>-amphetamine reward by food restriction but no effect of a “sensitizing” regimen of<Emphasis Type="Italic"> d</Emphasis>-amphetamine

Rationale Prior research indicates that psychostimulant-induced sensitization is not expressed in lateral hypothalamic electrical self-stimulation (LHSS)-based measures of drug reward, although the augmenting effect of chronic food restriction is. Neuroadaptations within the brain dopamine system have been identified in both psychostimulant-sensitized and food-restricted animals. Consequently, a variant of the LHSS paradigm in which responding is particularly sensitive to changes in dopaminergic tone may be best suited to detect and compare effects of chronic d-amphetamine and food restriction. Instrumental responding on a progressive ratio (PR) schedule is more sensitive to dopaminergic manipulations than is responding on a continuous reinforcement (CRF) schedule, but has not previously been used to examine chronic psychostimulant and food restriction effects on LHSS-based measures of drug reward.Objective The first aim of this study was to determine whether a regimen of d-amphetamine treatment, that produces locomotor sensitization (5 mg/kg per day×5 days), increases the reward-potentiating effect of d-amphetamine in a PR LHSS protocol. The second aim, was to determine whether chronic food restriction produces a marked increase in the reward-potentiating effect of d-amphetamine in the PR LHSS protocol and, if so, whether it is reversible in parallel with body weight recovery when free feeding is restored.Method Reward-potentiating effects of a challenge dose of d-amphetamine (0.25 mg/kg, IP) were measured in terms of the break point of LHSS responding on a PR schedule of reinforcement, in ad libitum fed and food-restricted rats.Results A regimen of d-amphetamine treatment that produced locomotor sensitization did not increase the break point for LHSS in the presence or absence of d-amphetamine. Chronic food restriction produced a marked increase in the break point-increasing effect of d-amphetamine (3-fold), which returned to baseline in parallel with body weight recovery over a 4-week period of restored free-feeding.Conclusions A locomotor-sensitizing regimen of d-amphetamine treatment does not increase the rewarding effect of LH electrical stimulation or the reward-potentiating effect of d-amphetamine in a PR LHSS protocol. The augmenting effect of chronic food restriction on drug reward is mechanistically and functionally different from psychostimulant sensitization and may be controlled by signals associated with adipose depletion and repletion.     

DSP4 alters the effect of d-amphetamine on variable-interval performance: analysis in terms of Herrnstein's equation

The effect of d-amphetamine (0.1–3.2 mg/kg) on performance in variable-interval 1-min and variable-interval 12-min schedules of positive reinforcement was examined in ten rats treated with the selective noradrenaline neurotoxin DSP4 and 12 control rats. In the control group d-amphetamine had a dose-dependent suppressant effect on response rates maintained under variable-interval 1-min; under variable-interval 12-min, response rates were increased by low doses and suppressed by higher doses of the drug. In the case of both schedules, lower doses of d-amphetamine were more suppressant and higher doses less suppressant in the DSP4-treated group than in the control group. The levels of noradrenaline in the parietal cortex, hippocampus and cerebellum (determined by high-performance liquid chromatography) were reduced to approximately 15% of control levels in the DSP4-treated rats. The results indicate that treatment with DSP4 attenuated both the facilitatory and the suppressant effects of d-amphetamine on variable-interval performance. A formal model couched in terms of Herrnstein's (1970) equation is put forward to account for these results. It is suggested that the noradrenergic pathways emanating from the locus caeruleus are involved in both the facilitatory and suppressant effects of d-amphetamine on operant behaviour.     

Effects of triadimefon on a multiple schedule of fixed-interval performance: Comparison with methylphenidate, d-amphetamine and chlorpromazine

Triadimefon is a fungicide that has recently been shown to increase motor activity and rates of schedule-controlled responding. These findings indicate that triadimefon resembles psychomotor stimulants and in this respect is a unique pesticide. The present experiment was designed to evaluate triadimefon's effects on performance maintained by a multiple schedule of reinforcement and to compare triadimefon to known psychomotor stimulants. Four rats were trained to perform under a mult FI 1-min FI 5-min schedule of milk reinforcement. They then received a series of dosages of triadimefon (10–170 mg/kg, IP) and of methylphenidate (1–17.3 mg/kg, IP) in a counterbalanced order. Triadimefon increased response rates in both the FI 1-min and FI 5-min components. Methylphenidate did not consistently alter response rates in either component. Temporal patterns of responding were disrupted much more in the FI 5-min component than in the FI 1-min component by both triadimefon and methylphenidate. Performances were then evaluated following a series of dosages of d-amphetamine (0.3–3.0 mg/kg, IP) and chlorpromazine (0.5–2.0 mg/kg, IP). Response rates were increased d-amphetamine in the FI 1-min component but not in the FI 5-min component. Like triadimefon and methylphenidate, d-amphetamine produced a greater disruption of response patterning in FI 5-min than in FI 1-min. Only chlorpromazine decreased response rates in both components. Chlorpromazine also disrupted FI 5-min response patterning, but left FI 1-min patterning intact. Although triadimefon did not closely resemble any of the comparison drugs, it had opposite effects on response rates from chlorpromazine in both components of the schedule and resembled d-amphetamine in its effects on FI 1-min response rates. The rate-increasing effects frequently obtained with psychomotor stimulants were more evident for triadimefon than for either methylphenidate or d-amphetamine.     

Interactions of naloxone with morphine,amphetamine and phencyclidine on fixed interval responding for intracranial self-stimulation in rats

Rats were implanted with stimulating electrodes aimed at the medial forebrain bundle-lateral hypothalamus (MFB-LH) and were trained to lever-press for brain self-stimulation on a fixed interval: 60 s schedule of reinforcement. The effects of graded doses of naloxone (0.1–30 mg/kg), morphine (0.3–5.6 mg/kg), naloxone plus morphine,d-amphetamine (0.03–1.0 mg/kg), naloxone plusd-amphetamine, phencyclidine (0.3–5.6 mg/kg), and naloxone plus phencyclidine were tested. Naloxone produced a significant decrease in rates at 30 mg/kg. Naloxone (0.1–1.0 mg/kg) plus morphine blocked the dose-dependent decrease produced by morphine alone. In contrast, naloxone (1.0–10 mg/kg) plusd-amphetamine attenuated the graded increase in response rates produced byd-amphetamine. Naloxone (1.0–10 mg/kg) plus phencyclidine did not reliably change the increase in response rates produced by phencyclidine alone. The use of the fixed interval schedule of brain self-stimulation to study these drug interactions is novel, and further demonstrates that the highly reinforcing aspects of brain stimulation, known to be influenced by dopamine, may also be modulated by the endogenous opiate system.     

Punished behavior: Increases in responding after d-amphetamine

Responding maintained in squirrel monkeys under a 10-min fixed-interval schedule of food presentation was suppressed by presenting a shock after every 30 th response (punishment). During alternate 10-min periods of the same experimental session, but in the presence of a different discriminative stimulus, responding either had no effect (extinction) or postponed delivery of an electric shock (avoidance). During sessions when the avoidance schedule was not in effect, d-amphetamine sulfate decreased punished responding. When the avoidance schedule was present during alternate 10-min periods, however, d-amphetamine (0.01–0.56 mg/kg, i.m.) markedly increased responding during punishment components. Increases in responding during avoidance components were also evident. The effects of d-amphetamine on punished responding depend on the context in which that responding occurs.     

d-Amphetamine differentially affects low,but not high response rates of male and female Wistar rats

The present experiments investigated sex differences in the effects of d-amphetamine on schedule-controlled behavior. Male and female Wistar rats were exposed to either a differential reinforcement of low rate 15 s schedule, or a differential reinforcement of high rate 0.75 s schedule and challenged with different doses of d-amphetamine (0.2, 0.4, 0.8, 1.6 and 3.2 mg/kg). d-Amphetamine in low to moderate doses increased low response rates. High doses of d-amphetamine decreased low and high response rates in both males and females. The response rate increasing effects of d-amphetamine on low baseline rates were significantly higher for females than for males. Sex differences for high baseline rates were not observed. The results of these experiments show not only that hormonal and neurochemical variables influence the effects of d-amphetamine administration on schedule-controlled behavior, but also that environmental contingencies maintaining the behavior can modify these effects.     

Effects of acute and chronic interactions of diazepam and d-Amphetamine on punished behavior of rats

Drinking of water-deprived rats was punished by delivery of either 0.03 or 0.1 mA shocks through the drinking tube during the last 5 of 7-s tone components during a 15-min daily exposure to water. These sessions consisted of 66 alternating components marked by the presence or absence of a tone. Drinking was not punished during the 33 components without tones or during the first 2 s of each tone. The baseline number of shocks accepted by the rats at 0.1 mA was less than half that at 0.03 mA. Acute diazepam markedly increased shocks delivered from the baseline values for both shock intensities, while acute d-amphetamine either had no effect or decreased the number of shocks accepted. The combination of acute diazepam and d-amphetamine caused a decrease in shock rates as compared to diazepam alone. Daily treatment with the combination of 10 mg/kg diazepam and 1 mg/kg d-amphetamine caused a gradual increase in punished responding over 25 days under either shock intensity. Gross observation of these rats after daily treatments indicated the development of hyperreactivity and a pattern resembling stereotyped behavior. At the end of the chronic treatment with the drug combination the shock rates were significantly greater than those caused by diazepam alone. Nevertheless, neither the effect of diazepam nor that of d-amphetamine, when administered singly after the period of chronic treatment with the combination, differed significantly from initial effect of the respective drugs on punished responding.