Self-administration of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) by drug naive squirrel monkeys
- 674 Downloads
Interest in therapeutic activities of cannabinoids has been restrained by the fact that they are most often mediated through activation of cannabinoid CB1 receptors, the same receptors that mediate the effects of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and are responsible for the abuse liability of marijuana. Persistent intravenous self-administration of THC by animals was first demonstrated in squirrel monkeys and shown to be mediated by CB1 receptors, but monkeys in the study had a history of cocaine self-administration, raising the possibility that persistent neurobiological adaptations might subsequently predispose animals to self-administer THC.
To demonstrate persistent intravenous self-administration of THC in drug-naive squirrel monkeys.
Monkeys with no history of exposure to other drugs learned to press a lever for intravenous injections (0.2 ml in 0.2 s) of THC under a 10-response, fixed-ratio schedule with a 60-s time-out after each injection. Acquisition of THC self-administration was rapid and the final schedule was reached in 11–34 sessions. Dose of THC was then varied from 1 to 16 µg/kg per injection with vehicle extinction following each dose of THC.
THC maintained significantly higher numbers of self-administered injections per session and higher rates of responding than vehicle at doses of 2, 4 and 8 µg/kg per injection, with maximal rates of responding at 4 µg/kg per injection. Response rates, injections per session and total THC intake per session were two- to three-fold greater in monkeys with no history of exposure to other drugs compared to previous findings in monkeys with a history of cocaine self-administration.
THC can act as an effective reinforcer of drug-taking behavior in monkeys with no history of exposure to other drugs, suggesting that self-administration of THC by monkeys provides a reliable animal model of human marijuana abuse.
KeywordsCannabis Δ9 -Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) Drug self-administration Squirrel monkeys Marijuana
This work was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services.
- Carroll ME, Meisch RA (1984) Increased drug-reinforced behavior due to food deprivation. In: Thompson T, Dews PB, Barrett JE (eds) Advances in behavioral pharmacology. Academic Press, New York, pp 47–88Google Scholar
- Cheer JF, Kendall DA, Marsden CA (2000) Cannabinoid receptors and reward in the rat: a conditioned place preference study. Psychopharmacology 151:25–30Google Scholar
- Fattore L, Cossu G, Martellotta CM, Fratta W (2001) Intravenous self-administration of the cannabinoid CB1 receptor agonist WIN 55,212-2 in rats. Psychopharmacology 156:410–416Google Scholar
- Gaoni Y, Mechoulam R (1964) Isolation, structure, and partial synthesis of an active constituent of hashish. J Am Chem Soc 86:1646–1647Google Scholar
- Mansbach RS, Nicholson KL, Martin BR, Balster RL (1994) Failure of delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol and CP 55,940 to maintain intravenous self-administration under a fixed-interval schedule in rhesus monkeys. Behav Pharmacol 5:219–225Google Scholar
- Martellotta MC, Cossu G, Fattore L, Gessa GL, Fratta W (1998) Self-administration of the cannabinoid receptor agonist WIN 55,212-2 in drug-naive mice. Neuroscience 85:327–330Google Scholar
- Sidman M, Stebbins WC (1954) Satiation effects under fixed-ratio schedules of reinforcement. Comp Physiol Psychol 47:114–116Google Scholar
- Tanda G, Goldberg SR (2003) Cannabinoids: reward, dependence and underlying neurochemical mechanisms. A review of recent preclinical data. Psychopharmacology DOI 10.1007/s00213-003-1485-7Google Scholar
- Valjent E, Maldonado R (2000) A behavioural model to reveal place preference to delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol in mice. Psychopharmacology 147:436–438Google Scholar
- Young AM, Herling S (1986) Drugs as reinforcers: studies in laboratory animals. In: Goldberg SR, Stolerman IP (eds) Behavioral analysis of drug dependence. Academic Press, Orlando, pp 9–67Google Scholar