Abstract
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Archer T, Fredriksson A, Jonsson G, Levander T, Mohammed AK, Ross SB, Söderberg U (1986) Central nordrenaline depletion antagonizes aspects of d-amphetamine-induced hyperactivity in the rat. Psychopharmacology 88:141–146
Beninger RJ (1983) The role of dopamine in locomotor activity and learning. Brain Res Revs 6:173–196
Beninger RJ, Hahn BL (1983) Pimozide blocks establishment but not expression of amphetamine-produced environment-specific conditioning. Science 220:1304–1306
Bradshaw CM, Ruddle HV, Szabadi E (1981) Relationship between response rate and reinforcement frequency in variable-interval schedules: III The effect of d-amphetamine. J Exp Anal Behav 36:29–39
Catania AC, Reynolds GS (1968) A quantitative analysis of the responding maintained by interval schedules of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav 11:327–383
Christensen AV, Arnt J, Hyttel J, Larsen J-J, Svendsen O (1984a) Pharmacological effects of a specific dopamine D-1 antagonist SCH 23390 in comparison with neuroleptics. Life Sci 34:1529–1540
Christensen AV, Arnt J, Hyttel J, Svendsen O (1984b) Behavioural correlates to the dopamine D-1 and D-2 antagonists. Pol J Pharmacol Pharm 36:249–264
Dews PB, Wenger GR (1977) Rate-dependency of the behavioral effects of amphetamine. In: Thompson T, Dews PB (eds) Advances in behavioral pharmacology, vol 1. Academic Press, New York, pp 167–227
Gallistel CR, Karras D (1984) Pimozide and amphetamine have opposing effects on the reward summation function. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 20:73–77
Herrnstein RJ (1970) On the law of effect. J Exp Anal Behav 13:243–266
Herrnstein RJ (1974) Formal properties of the matching law. J Exp Anal Behav 21:159–164
Heyman GM (1983) A parametric evaluation of the hedonic and motoric effects of drugs: pimozide and amphetamine. J Exp Anal Behav 40:113–122
Lucki I (1983) Rate-dependent effects of amphetamine on responding under random-interval schedules of reinforcement in the rat. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 18:195–201
Lucki I, De Long RE (1983) Control rate of response or reinforcement and amphetamine's effect on behavior. J Exp Anal Behav 40:123–132
Mackey WB, van der Kooy D (1985) Neuroleptics block the positive reinforcing effects of amphetamine but not of morphine as measured by place conditioning. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 22:101–105
Moore KE (1978) Amphetamines: biochemical and behavioral actions in animals. In: Iversen LL, Iversen SD, Snyder SH (eds) Handbook of psychopharmacology, vol 11. Raven, New York, pp 41–98
Morley MJ, Bradshaw CM, Szabadi E (1984) The effects of pimozide on variable-interval performance: a test of the “anhedonia” hypothesis of the mode of action of neuroleptics. Psychopharmacology 84:531–536
Morley MJ, Bradshaw CM, Szabadi E (1985) The effect of d-amphetamine on operant behaviour maintained under variable-interval schedules of reinforcement. Psychopharmacology 87:207–211
Ögren SO, Archer T, Johansson C (1983) Evidence for a selective brain noradrenergic involvement in the locomotor stimulant effects of amphetamine in the rat. Neurosci Lett 43:327–331
Peroutka SJ, U'Prichard DC, Greenberg DA, Snyder SH (1977) Neuroleptic drug interactions with norepinephrine alpha receptor binding sites in rat brain. Neuropharmacology 16:549–556
Rebec GV, Bashore TR (1984) Critical issues in assessing the behavioral effects of amphetamine. Neurosci Behav Rev 8:153–159
Robbins TW, Evenden JL (1985) Rate-independent approaches to the analysis of drug action. In: Lowe CF, Richelle M, Blackman DE, Bradshaw CM (eds), Behaviour analysis and contemporary psychology. Erlbaum, London, pp 217–256
Robbins TW, Roberts DGS, Koob GF (1983) Effects of d-amphetamine and apomorphine upon operant behavior and schedule-induced licking in rats with 6-hydroxydopamine-induced lesions of the nucleus accumbens. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 224:662–673
Sanger DJ, Blackman DE (1975) Rate-dependent effects of drugs on the variable-interval behavior of rats. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 194:343–350
Wise RA (1978) Catecholamine theories of reward: a critical review. Brain Res 152:215–247
Wise RA (1982) Neuroleptics and operant behavior: the anhedonia hypothesis. Behav Brain Sci 5:39–87
Worms P, Broekkamp CLE, Lloyd KG (1983) Behavioral effects of neuroleptics. In: Coyle JT, Enna SJ (eds) Neuroleptics: neurochemical, behavioral and clinical perspectives. Raven, New York, pp 93–117
Yokel RA, Wise RA (1975) Increased lever pressing for amphetamine after pimozide in rats: implications for a dopamine theory of reward. Science 187:547–549
Yokel RA, Wise RA (1976) Attenuation of intravenous amphetamine reinforcement by central dopamine blockade in rats. Psychopharmacology 48:311–318
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Morley, M.J., Bradshaw, C.M. & Szabadi, E. Attenuation by pimozide of the suppressant effect of d-amphetamine on operant behaviour. Psychopharmacology 91, 239–243 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00217071
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00217071