, Volume 92, Issue 2, pp 262–264 | Cite as

Effects of pimozide on sucrose consumption and preference

  • A. Towell
  • R. Muscat
  • P. Willner
Original Investigations


The effects of pimozide on sucrose intake were examined, in a two-bottle preference test (sucrose versus water), and in single-bottle tests at five different sucrose concentrations. In the two-bottle test, pimozide dose dependently decreased sucrose intake but increased water intake. In the single-bottle test pimozide decreased sucrose intake at low concentrations but had no effect at high concentrations. The results support a role for dopamine in mediating the rewarding effect of sucrose.

Key words

Sucrose preference Two-bottle test Pimozide Dopamine 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Antin J, Gibbs J, Smith GP (1975) Cholecystokinin elicits the complete behavioural sequence of satiety in rats. J Comp Physiol Psychol 89:784–790Google Scholar
  2. Beninger RJ (1983) The role of dopamine in locomotion activity and learning. Brain Res Rev 6:173–196Google Scholar
  3. Bernz JA, Smith GP, Gibbs J (1983) A comparison of the effectiveness of intraperitoneal injections of bombesin (BBS) and cholecystokinin (CCK-8) to reduce sham feeding of different sucrose solutions. Proc EPA 54:95Google Scholar
  4. Ernits T, Corbit JD (1973) Taste as a dipsogenic stimulus. J Comp Physiol Psychol 83:27–31Google Scholar
  5. Fouriezos G, Wise RA (1976) Pimozide-induced extinction of intracranial self-stimulation: Response patterns rule out motor performance deficits. Brain Res 103:377–380Google Scholar
  6. Fouriezos G, Hansson P, Wise RA (1978) Neuroleptic-induced attenuation of brain stimulation reward. J Comp Physiol Psychol 92:659–669Google Scholar
  7. Garcia J, Kimdeldorf DJ, Hunt EL (1957) Spatial avoidance in the rat as a result of exposure to ionizing radiation. Br J Radiat 30:318–321Google Scholar
  8. Geary N, Smith GP (1985) Pimozide decreases the positive reinforcing effect of sham feed sucrose in the rat. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 22:787–790Google Scholar
  9. Gilbert D, Cooper SJ (1983) p-Phenylethylamine, d-amphetamine and l-amphetamine-induced place preference conditioning in rats. Eur J Pharmacol 95:311–314Google Scholar
  10. Herrnstein RJ (1970) On the law of effect. J Exp Anal Behav 13:243–266Google Scholar
  11. Heyman GM (1983) A parametric evaluation of the hedonic and motoric effects of drugs: pimozide and amphetamine. J Exp Anal Behav 40:113–122Google Scholar
  12. Heyman GM, Kinzie DL, Seiden LS (1986) Chloropromazine and pimozide alter reinforcement efficacy and motor performance. Psychopharmacology 88:346–353Google Scholar
  13. Hoebel BG, Hernandez L, McLean S, Stanley BG, Aulissi EF, Glimcher P, Margolin D (1981) Catecholamines, enkephalin and neurotensin in feeding and reward. In: Hoebel BG, Novin D (eds) The neurobiology of feeding and reward. Haer Institute, Brunswick, MaineGoogle Scholar
  14. Liebman J (1983) Discriminating between reward and performance: A critical review of self-stimulation methodology. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 7:45–72Google Scholar
  15. Mook DG (1969) Some determinants of preference and aversion in the rat. Ann NY Acad Sci 157:1158–1173Google Scholar
  16. Pfaffman C (1982) Taste: a model of incentive motivation. In: Pfaff DW (ed) The physiological mechanisms of motivation. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 61–97Google Scholar
  17. Pinder RM, Brogden RN, Sawyer PR, Speight TM, Spencer R, Avery GS (1976) Pimozide: A review of its pharmacological properties and therapeutic uses in psychiatry. Drugs 12:1–40Google Scholar
  18. Sandberg D, Vaillancourt M, Wise R, Stewart J (1982) Effects of pimozide on saccharin and sucrose concentrations. Soc Neurosci Abstr 8:603Google Scholar
  19. Smith GP, Gibbs J (1979) Postprandial satiety. In: Sprague J, Epstein A (eds) Progress in psychobiology and physiological psychology, vol 8. Academic, New York, pp 179–242Google Scholar
  20. Spyraki C, Fibiger HC, Phillips AG (1982) Attenuation by haloperidol of place preference conditioning using food reinforcement. Psychopharmacology 77:379–382Google Scholar
  21. Turkish S, Cooper SJ (1982) Naloxone and naltrexone change food selection in hungry rats under conditions of famimliarity. Soc Neurosci Abstr 8:712Google Scholar
  22. Weingarten HP, Watson SD (1982) Sham feeding as a procedure for assessing the influence of diet palatability on food intake. Physiol Behav 28:401–407Google Scholar
  23. Willner P (1983) Dopamine and depression: a review of recent evidence. II. Theoretical approaches. Brain Res Rev 6:225–236Google Scholar
  24. Wise RA (1982) Neuroleptics and operant behaviour: The anhedonia hypothesis. Behav Brain Sci 5:39–87Google Scholar
  25. Xenakis S, Sclafani A (1981) The effects of pimozide on the consumption of a palatable saccharin-glucose solution in the rat. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 15:435–442Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Towell
    • 1
  • R. Muscat
    • 1
  • P. Willner
    • 1
  1. 1.Psychology DepartmentCity of London PolytechnicLondonUK

Personalised recommendations