Farelerde bireysel lokomotor aktivite farklılığının nikotin duyarlılaşmasına etkileri

Amaç: Bu çalışmada, farelerin lokomotor aktivitesindeki (LMA) bireysel farklılığın tekrarlı nikotin uygulanması ile oluşturulan nikotin duyarlılaşmasına etkisi incelenmiştir. Yöntem: Çalışmanın başlangıcında, dişi Swiss-Webster farelere dört gün süre ile her gün salin uygulandı ve hemen LMA kafesi içine bırakılarak 30 dakika LMA'ları kaydedildi. Fareler 4. gündeki aktivite değerlerine göre düşük ve yüksek LMA'lı gruplara ayrıldı. Alışma işleminden sonra, ayrılan hayvanlarda duyarlılaşma oluşturmak için 19 gün süre ile iki günde bir nikotin (0.5-2 mg/kg) ve salin (kontrol) intraperitoneal yoldan uygulandı. Aynı işlemler ayrım yapılmamış gruplara da uygulandı. Bulgular: Lokomotor duyarlılaşma gelişimi, yüksek yada düşük LMA ayrımı yapılmayan ve yapılan gruplarda ayrı ayrı test edildi. Yüksek doz nikotin (2 mg/kg) tüm gruplarda (düşük ve yüksek LMA'lı ve ayrım yapılmayan gruplar) duya rlılaşma oluşturdu. Düşük doz nikotin (1 mg/kg) ise sadece düşük LMA'lı gruplarda duyarlılaşma oluşturdu, diğer gruplarda oluşturmadı. Sonuç: Farelerde bireysel LMA farklılıkları nikotine lokomotor duyarlılaşma gelişiminde önemli bir faktör olabilir. Düşük LMA'lı farelerde nikotine duyarlılaşma ve nikotin bağımlılığı daha kolay gelişebilir.

The effects of individual locomotor activity difference on the nicotine sensitization in mice

Objective: In this study the effects of individual differences in the locomotor activity (LMA) of mice on the development of nicotine-induced sensitization developed by repeated nicotine treatment was investigated. Method: At the beginning of the study, female Swiss -Webster mice were treated with saline for 4 days, daily. They placed into the LMA cages and their LMAs re-corded for 30 min immediately after treatment. Mice were separated into groups with low LMA or high LMA, according to their activity scores on the 4th day. After habituation pro-cess, separated animals were treated wit h nicotine (0.5, 1 and 2 mg/kg, ip.) or saline, every second day for 19 days, to produce sensitization. The same procedure was also applied to the non-separated groups of mice.Results: The development of locomotor sensi-tization was tested separately in mice with low LMA and high LMA, and non-separated mice. High nicotine dose (2 mg/kg) was produced locomotor sensitization in all groups (low LMA, high LMA and non-separated groups). Low dose of nicotine (1 mg/kg) produced locomotor sensitization only in groups with low LMA. Conclusion: Individual LMA differences in mice may be an important factor in the development of nicotine-induced locomotor sensitization. Nicotine-induced sensitization or dependence can be developed easier in mice with low LMA

___

  • 1- Domino EF. Nicotine induced behavioral locomotor sensitization. Prog Neuro-Psychopharmacol Biol Psychiat 2001; 25: 59-71.2- Robinson TE, Berridge KC. The neural basis of drug craving: an incentive sensitization theory of addiction. Brain Res Rev 1993; 18: 247-291.3- Steward J, Badiani A. Tolerance and sensitization to the behavioral effects of drugs. Behav Pharmacol 1993; 4: 289-312.4- Berke JD, Hyman SE. Addiction, dopamine and the molecular mechanisms of memory. Neuron 2000; 25: 515-532.5- Pierce RC, Kalivas PW. A circiutry model of the expression of behavioral sensitization to amphetamine-like psychostimulants. Brain Res Rev 1997; 25: 192-216.6- Woolverton WL, Kleven MS. Multiple dopamine receptors and the behavioral effects of cocaine. NIDA Res Monogr 1988; 88: 160-184.7- Reid MS, Fox L, Ho LB, Berger SP. Nicotine stimulation of extracellular glutamate levels in the nucleus accumbens: neuropharmacological characterization. Synapse 2000; 35: 129-136.8- Birell CE, Balfour DJK. The influence of nicotine pretreatment on mesoaccumbens dopamine overflow and locomotor responses to d-amphetamine. Psychopharmacology 1998; 140: 142-149.9- Hernandez PJ, Sadeghian K, Kelley AE. Early consolidation of instrumental learning requires protein synthesis in the nucleus accumbens. Nature Neurosci 2002; 5: 1327-1331. 10- Piazza PV, Deminière J-M, LeMoal M, Simone H. Factors that predict individual vulnerability to amphetamine self-administration. Science 1989; 245: 1511-1513.11- Robinson, TE, Berridge KC. The psychology and neurobiology of addiction: an incentive-sensitization view. Addiction 2000; 95(Suppl. 2): 91-117.12- Browman KE, Badiani A, Robinson TE. The influence of environment on the induction of sensitization to the psychomotor activating effects of intravenous cocaine in rats is dose-dependent. Psychopharmacology 1998; 137: 90-98.13- Miller DK, Wilkins LH, Bardo MT, et al. Once weekly administration of nicotine produces long-lasting locomotor sensitization in rats via a nicotinic receptor-mediated mechanism. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2001; 156: 469-476.14- Robinson TE, Berridge KC. Mechanisms of action of addictive stimuli. Incentive-sensitization and addiction. Addiction 2001; 96:103-114.15- Kayir H, Uzbay IT. Investigation of a possible sensitization development to a challenge dose of ethanol after 2 weeks following the single injection in mice. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 2002; 73: 551-556.16- Vanderschuren LJMJ, Schmidt ED, De Vries TJ, et al. A single exposure to amphetamine is sufficient to induce long-term behavioral, neuroendocrine, and neurochemical sensitization in rats. J Neurosci 1999; 19: 9579-9586.17- Antelman S. Time-dependent sensitization as thecCornerstone for a new approach to pharmacotherapy: drugs as foreign/stressful stimuli. Drug Dev Res 1988; 14: 1-30.18- Prasad BM, Sorg BA, Ulibarri C, Kalivas PW. Sensitization to stress and psychostimulants involvement of dopamine transmission versus the HPA axis. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1995; 771: 617-625.19- Oitzl MS, van Haarst AD, de Kloet ER. Behavioral and neuroendocrine responses controlled by the concerted action of central mineralocorticoid (MRS) and glucocorticoid receptors (GRS). Psychoneuroendocrinology 1997; 22 (Suppl. 1): S87-S93.20- Collins AC, Miner LL, Marks MJ. Genetic influences on acute responses to nicotine and nicotine tolerance in the mouse. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 1988; 30: 269-278.21- Bevins RA, Besheer J, Pickett KS. Nicotine-conditioned locomotor activity in rats: dopaminergic and GABAergic influences on conditioned expression. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 2001; 68: 135-145.22- Bevins RA, Besheer J. Individual differences in rat locomotor activity are diminished by nicotine through stimulation of central nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. Physiology Behav 2001; 72: 237-244.23- Hakan RL, Ksir CJ. Nicotine induced locomotor activity in rats: the role of pavlovian conditioning. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 1988; 29: 661-665.24- Kempsill FE, Pratt JA. Mecamylamine but not the alpha7 receptor antagonist alpha-bungarotoxin blocks sensitization to the locomotor stimulant effects of nicotine. Br J Pharmacol 2000; 131 :997-1003.25- Benwell ME, Balfour DJ. The effects of acute and repeated nicotine treatment on nucleus accumbens dopamine and locomotor activity. Br J Pharmacol 1992; 105: 849-856.26- Balfour DJ, Benwell ME, Birrell CE, ve ark. Sensitization of the mesoaccumbens dopamine response to nicotine. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 1998; 59: 1021-1030.