, Volume 232, Issue 20, pp 3697–3707 | Cite as

Atomoxetine accelerates attentional set shifting without affecting learning rate in the rat

  • Nelson K. Totah
  • Nikos K. Logothetis
  • Oxana Eschenko
Original Investigation



Shifting to a new rule is a form of behavioral flexibility that is impaired in numerous psychiatric and neurological illnesses. Animal studies have revealed that this form of flexibility depends upon norepinephrine (NE) neurotransmission. Atomoxetine, a NE reuptake inhibitor, improves performance of humans in set shifting tasks.


Our objective was to validate its effects in a rodent set shifting task.


We tested the drug effect using an operant task that required a shift from a visual cue-guided behavior to a novel location-guided rule.


A 1.0-mg/kg dose significantly accelerated rule shifting without affecting learning strategies, such as win-stay or lose-shift. Fitting behavioral performance with a learning function provided a measure of learning rate.


This novel analysis revealed that atomoxetine accelerated shifting to the new rule without affecting learning rate.


Attention Learning Set-shifting Behavioral flexibility Rat Norepinephrine Prefrontal cortex ADHD Schizophrenia 



We thank G. Katakalidis and D. Vasilyev for training animals. We also thank A. Dwarakanath for the technical assistance with the psigfit MATLAB toolbox.


This work was funded by a Marie Curie fellowship to N.K.T. (PIIF-GA-2012-331122) in the European Union FP7 funding scheme and the Max Planck Society.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Supplementary material

213_2015_4028_MOESM1_ESM.xlsx (11 kb)
Table S1 The percent of trials that were correct responses and omissions for each rule are shown as an SEM for each drug dose. The light cue-guided session was preceded by a saline injection for all rats, while the location-based session was preceded by the drug injection. Omissions for both rules and all drug doses were low. (XLSX 11 kb)
213_2015_4028_Fig5_ESM.gif (127 kb)
Figure S1

Individual switch point, slope, and fits for all rats in the study. A. The fit of the performance for each rat is plotted for each drug dose and each size of trial block. The top panel is the high dose, the middle panel the low dose, and the bottom panel is vehicle (control). Each column is labeled with the number of trials used in a block for calculating performance. Individual rats are plotted in differently colored lines and the legend contains the rat identification number. B. The switch point acquired from the performance fits of each rat (above) are plotted according to the drug dose. Rats which were outliers are marked in red with their identification number. As in A, the columns are labeled with the number of trials used in a block for calculating performance. Note that the same rat (r1052), which received 1.0 mg/kg atomoxetine, was an outlier for all block sizes used to calculate performance. The top panel of A shows the performance of this rat as a purple line. (GIF 127 kb)

213_2015_4028_MOESM2_ESM.tif (19.7 mb)
High resolution image (TIFF 20127 kb)


  1. Aston-Jones G, Cohen JD (2005) Adaptive gain and the role of the locus coeruleus-norepinephrine system in optimal performance. J Comp Neurol 493:99–110. doi: 10.1002/cne.20723 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Aston-Jones G, Rajkowski J, Kubiak P, Alexinsky T (1994) Locus coeruleus neurons in monkey are selectively activated by attended cues in a vigilance task. J Neurosci 14:4467–4480PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bari A, Aston-Jones G (2012) Atomoxetine modulates spontaneous and sensory-evoked discharge of locus coeruleus noradrenergic neurons. Neuropharmacology. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2012.07.020 PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Berridge CW, Devilbiss DM, Andrzejewski ME et al (2006) Methylphenidate preferentially increases catecholamine neurotransmission within the prefrontal cortex at low doses that enhance cognitive function. Biol Psychiatry 60:1111–1120. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2006.04.022 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bidwell LC, McClernon FJ, Kollins SH (2011) Cognitive enhancers for the treatment of ADHD. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 99:262–274. doi: 10.1016/j.pbb.2011.05.002 PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Birrell JM, Brown VJ (2000) Medial frontal cortex mediates perceptual attentional set shifting in the rat. J Neurosci 20:4320–4324PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bouret S, Sara SJ (2004) Reward expectation, orientation of attention and locus coeruleus-medial frontal cortex interplay during learning. Eur J Neurosci 20:791–802. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2004.03526.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Bymaster F (2002) Atomoxetine increases extracellular levels of norepinephrine and dopamine in prefrontal cortex of rat a potential mechanism for efficacy in attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Neuropsychopharmacology 27:699–711. doi: 10.1016/S0893-133X(02)00346-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Cain RE, Wasserman MC, Waterhouse BD, McGaughy JA (2011) Atomoxetine facilitates attentional set shifting in adolescent rats. Dev Cogn Neurosci 1:552–559. doi: 10.1016/j.dcn.2011.04.003 PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Carboni E, Tanda GL, Frau R, Di Chiara G (1990) Blockade of the noradrenaline carrier increases extracellular dopamine concentrations in the prefrontal cortex: evidence that dopamine is taken up in vivo by noradrenergic terminals. J Neurochem 55:1067–1070CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Ceaser AE, Goldberg TE, Egan MF et al (2008) Set-shifting ability and schizophrenia: a marker of clinical illness or an intermediate phenotype? Biol Psychiatry 64:782–788. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2008.05.009 PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Chamberlain SR, Müller U, Blackwell AD et al (2006) Neurochemical modulation of response inhibition and probabilistic learning in humans. Science 311:861–863. doi: 10.1126/science.1121218 PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Chen KC, Baxter MG, Rodefer JS (2004) Central blockade of muscarinic cholinergic receptors disrupts affective and attentional set-shifting. Eur J Neurosci 20:1081–1088. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2004.03548.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Clarke HF, Walker SC, Crofts HS et al (2005) Prefrontal serotonin depletion affects reversal learning but not attentional set shifting. J Neurosci 25:532–538. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3690-04.2005 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Craven RM, Priddle TH, Crow TJ, Esiri MM (2005) The locus coeruleus in schizophrenia: a postmortem study of noradrenergic neurones. Neuropathol Appl Neurobiol 31:115–126. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2990.2004.00597.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Dalley JW, McGaughy J, O’Connell MT et al (2001) Distinct changes in cortical acetylcholine and noradrenaline efflux during contingent and noncontingent performance of a visual attentional task. J Neurosci 21:4908–4914PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Dalton GL, Ma LM, Phillips AG, Floresco SB (2011) Blockade of NMDA GluN2B receptors selectively impairs behavioral flexibility but not initial discrimination learning. Psychopharmacology 216:525–535. doi: 10.1007/s00213-011-2246-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Darrah JM, Stefani MR, Moghaddam B (2008) Interaction of N-methyl-D-aspartate and group 5 metabotropic glutamate receptors on behavioral flexibility using a novel operant set-shift paradigm. Behav Pharmacol 19:225–234. doi: 10.1097/FBP.0b013e3282feb0ac PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Dayan P, Yu AJ (2006) Phasic norepinephrine: a neural interrupt signal for unexpected events. Network 17:335–350. doi: 10.1080/09548980601004024 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Dias R, Robbins TW, Roberts AC (1996) Dissociation in prefrontal cortex of affective and attentional shifts. Nature 380:69–72. doi: 10.1038/380069a0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Ding Y-S, Naganawa M, Gallezot J-D et al (2014) Clinical doses of atomoxetine significantly occupy both norepinephrine and serotonin transports: implications on treatment of depression and ADHD. NeuroImage 86:164–171. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.08.001 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Egerton A, Reid L, McKerchar CE et al (2005) Impairment in perceptual attentional set-shifting following PCP administration: a rodent model of set-shifting deficits in schizophrenia. Psychopharmacology 179:77–84. doi: 10.1007/s00213-004-2109-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Engberg G, Svensson TH (1980) Pharmacological analysis of a cholinergic receptor mediated regulation of brain norepinephrine neurons. J Neural Transm 49:137–150CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Fallon SJ, Williams-Gray CH, Barker RA et al (2013) Prefrontal dopamine levels determine the balance between cognitive stability and flexibility. Cereb Cortex 23:361–369. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhs025 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Floresco SB, Block AE, Tse MTL (2008) Inactivation of the medial prefrontal cortex of the rat impairs strategy set-shifting, but not reversal learning, using a novel, automated procedure. Behav Brain Res 190:85–96. doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2008.02.008 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Koda K, Ago Y, Cong Y et al (2010) Effects of acute and chronic administration of atomoxetine and methylphenidate on extracellular levels of noradrenaline, dopamine and serotonin in the prefrontal cortex and striatum of mice. J Neurochem 114:259–270. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-4159.2010.06750.x PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Lapiz MDS, Bondi CO, Morilak DA (2007) Chronic treatment with desipramine improves cognitive performance of rats in an attentional set-shifting test. Neuropsychopharmacology 32:1000–1010. doi: 10.1038/sj.npp.1301235 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Logan J, Wang G-J, Telang F et al (2007) Imaging the norepinephrine transporter in humans with (S, S)-[11C]O-methyl reboxetine and PET: problems and progress. Nucl Med Biol 34:667–679. doi: 10.1016/j.nucmedbio.2007.03.013 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Lohr JB, Jeste DV (1988) Locus ceruleus morphometry in aging and schizophrenia. Acta Psychiatr Scand 77:689–697CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Ludolph AG, Udvardi PT, Schaz U et al (2010) Atomoxetine acts as an NMDA receptor blocker in clinically relevant concentrations. Br J Pharmacol 160:283–291. doi: 10.1111/j.1476-5381.2010.00707.x PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Mackintosh NJ (1975) A theory of attention: variations in the associability of stimuli with reinforcement. Psychol Rev 82:276–298. doi: 10.1037/h0076778 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. McGaughy J, Ross RS, Eichenbaum H (2008) Noradrenergic, but not cholinergic, deafferentation of prefrontal cortex impairs attentional set-shifting. Neuroscience 153:63–71. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2008.01.064 PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Mehta MA, Goodyer IM, Sahakian BJ (2004) Methylphenidate improves working memory and set-shifting in AD/HD: relationships to baseline memory capacity. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 45:293–305CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Milner B (1963) Effects of different brain lesions on card sorting: the role of the frontal lobes. Arch Neurol 9:90–100. doi: 10.1001/archneur.1963.00460070100010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mingote S, de Bruin JPC, Feenstra MGP (2004) Noradrenaline and dopamine efflux in the prefrontal cortex in relation to appetitive classical conditioning. J Neurosci 24:2475–2480. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4547-03.2004 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Morón JA, Brockington A, Wise RA et al (2002) Dopamine uptake through the norepinephrine transporter in brain regions with low levels of the dopamine transporter: evidence from knock-out mouse lines. J Neurosci 22:389–395PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Newman LA, Darling J, McGaughy J (2008) Atomoxetine reverses attentional deficits produced by noradrenergic deafferentation of medial prefrontal cortex. Psychopharmacology 200:39–50. doi: 10.1007/s00213-008-1097-8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Owen AM, Roberts AC, Polkey CE et al (1991) Extra-dimensional versus intra-dimensional set shifting performance following frontal lobe excisions, temporal lobe excisions or amygdalo-hippocampectomy in man. Neuropsychologia 29:993–1006CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Owen AM, Roberts AC, Hodges JR et al (1993) Contrasting mechanisms of impaired attentional set-shifting in patients with frontal lobe damage or Parkinson’s disease. Brain 116(Pt 5):1159–1175CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Pantelis C, Barber FZ, Barnes TR et al (1999) Comparison of set-shifting ability in patients with chronic schizophrenia and frontal lobe damage. Schizophr Res 37:251–270CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Pearce JM, Hall G (1980) A model for Pavlovian learning: variations in the effectiveness of conditioned but not of unconditioned stimuli. Psychol Rev 87:532–552CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Pedersen CS, Goetghebeur P, Dias R (2009) Chronic infusion of PCP via osmotic mini-pumps: a new rodent model of cognitive deficit in schizophrenia characterized by impaired attentional set-shifting (ID/ED) performance. J Neurosci Methods 185:66–69. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2009.09.014 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Rajkowski J, Kubiak P, Aston-Jones G (1994) Locus coeruleus activity in monkey: phasic and tonic changes are associated with altered vigilance. Brain Res Bull 35:607–616. doi: 10.1016/0361-9230(94)90175-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Rhodes MG (2004) Age-related differences in performance on the Wisconsin card sorting test: a meta-analytic review. Psychol Aging 19:482–494. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.19.3.482 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Roberts AC, Robbins TW, Everitt BJ, Muir JL (1992) A specific form of cognitive rigidity following excitotoxic lesions of the basal forebrain in marmosets. Neuroscience 47:251–264CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Sanders JD, Happe HK, Bylund DB, Murrin LC (2005) Development of the norepinephrine transporter in the rat CNS. Neuroscience 130:107–117. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2004.09.014 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Schoenbaum G, Nugent SL, Saddoris MP, Setlow B (2002) Orbitofrontal lesions in rats impair reversal but not acquisition of go, no-go odor discriminations. Neuroreport 13:885–890CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Seidman LJ, Biederman J, Faraone SV et al (1997) Toward defining a neuropsychology of attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder: performance of children and adolescents from a large clinically referred sample. J Consult Clin Psychol 65:150–160CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Sesack SR, Hawrylak VA, Matus C et al (1998) Dopamine axon varicosities in the prelimbic division of the rat prefrontal cortex exhibit sparse immunoreactivity for the dopamine transporter. J Neurosci 18:2697–2708PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Setlik J, Bond GR, Ho M (2009) Adolescent prescription ADHD medication abuse is rising along with prescriptions for these medications. Pediatrics 124:875–880. doi: 10.1542/peds.2008-0931 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Spencer T, Biederman J, Wilens T et al (1998) Effectiveness and tolerability of tomoxetine in adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Am J Psychiatry 155:693–695. doi: 10.1176/ajp.155.5.693 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Stefani MR, Groth K, Moghaddam B (2003) Glutamate receptors in the rat medial prefrontal cortex regulate set-shifting ability. Behav Neurosci 117:728–737CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Sun H, Cocker PJ, Zeeb FD, Winstanley CA (2011) Chronic atomoxetine treatment during adolescence decreases impulsive choice, but not impulsive action, in adult rats and alters markers of synaptic plasticity in the orbitofrontal cortex. Psychopharmacology 219:285–301. doi: 10.1007/s00213-011-2419-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Tait DS, Brown VJ (2008) Lesions of the basal forebrain impair reversal learning but not shifting of attentional set in rats. Behav Brain Res 187:100–108. doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2007.08.035 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Tait DS, Brown VJ, Farovik A et al (2007) Lesions of the dorsal noradrenergic bundle impair attentional set-shifting in the rat. Eur J Neurosci 25:3719–3724. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2007.05612.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Tzavara ET, Bymaster FP, Overshiner CD et al (2006) Procholinergic and memory enhancing properties of the selective norepinephrine uptake inhibitor atomoxetine. Mol Psychiatry 11:187–195. doi: 10.1038/ CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Usher M, Cohen JD, Servan-Schreiber D et al (1999) The role of locus coeruleus in the regulation of cognitive performance. Science 283:549–554CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Wichmann FA, Hill NJ (2001a) The psychometric function: I. Fitting, sampling, and goodness of fit. Percept Psychophys 63:1293–1313CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Wichmann FA, Hill NJ (2001b) The psychometric function: II. Bootstrap-based confidence intervals and sampling. Percept Psychophys 63:1314–1329CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Wong DT, Threlkeld PG, Best KL, Bymaster FP (1982) A new inhibitor of norepinephrine uptake devoid of affinity for receptors in rat brain. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 222:61–65PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nelson K. Totah
    • 1
  • Nikos K. Logothetis
    • 1
  • Oxana Eschenko
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Physiology of Cognitive ProcessesMax Planck Institute for Biological CyberneticsTuebingenGermany

Personalised recommendations