Advertisement

Psychopharmacology

, Volume 85, Issue 1, pp 123–128 | Cite as

Dopamine-sensitive alternation and collateral behaviour in a Y-maze: Effects of d-amphetamine and haloperidol

  • Robert Oades
  • Khalid Taghzouti
  • Hervé Simon
  • Michel Le Moal
Original Investigations

Abstract

The degree of alternation of arm choice in a Y-maze was examined on 15-min tests over 4 days in rats treated (IP) with saline, amphetamine (0.5 or 2.0 mg/kg) or pretreated with haloperidol (0.08 mg/kg) in each condition prior to test. On day 1 amphetamine-treated animals chose arms at random, but from day 2–4 those receiving the higher dose perseverated their choice. Controls maintained alternation. These effects could be prevented by haloperidol pretreatment. Amphetamine treatment increased the frequency of rearing at the middle, choice-point of the maze more than at the end of an arm. The increase at the mid-point was suppressed by haloperidol pretreatment from day 1 and at the end of an arm from day 2. Amphetamine induced an increase in head-turning/“looking” that was suppressed by haloperidol from day 2. The effect of haloperidol in increasing the duration of an item of looking or rearing at the end of an arm also started later in testing. Two effects are postulated to have occurred: (i) a conflict on day 1 between novelty-controlled sensory or attentional effects that leads to an alternation of arm choice and amphetamine-induced dopaminergic activity that facilitates an alternation of behavioural responses. The result was random choice and increased rearing at the choice point. (ii) On days 2–4 the drug-induced effects on switching motor responses came to control behaviour.

Key words

Amphetamine Haloperidol Dopamine Y-Maze Alternation Rearing Collateral behaviour “Switching” Novelty Attention Rat 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adkins J, Packwood JW, Marshall GL (1969) Spontaneous alternation and d-amphetamine. Psychonom Sci 17:167–168Google Scholar
  2. Broadbent DE (1971) Decision and Stress. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. Carlton PL (1963) Cholinergic mechanisms in the control of behaviour by the brain. Psychol Rev 70:19–39Google Scholar
  4. Clody DE, Carlton PL (1969) Behavioral effects of lesions of the medial septum of cats. Physiol Psychol 67:344–351Google Scholar
  5. Cools AR, Van Rossum JM (1980) Minireview: Multiple receptors for brain dopamine in behavior regulation: concept of dopamine-E and dopamine-I receptors. Life Sci 27:1237–1253Google Scholar
  6. Dalland T (1970) Response and stimulus perseveration in rats with septal and dorsal hippocampal lesions. J Comp Physiol Psychol 71:111–118Google Scholar
  7. Dember WM (1961) Alternation behavior. In: Fiske DW, Meddi SR (eds) Functions of varied experience. Dorsey, Homewood Ill, pp 227–252Google Scholar
  8. Dennis W (1939) Spontaneous alternation in rats as an indicator of the persistence of stimulus effects. J Comp Psychol 28:305–312Google Scholar
  9. Douglas RJ (1966) Cues for spontaneous alternation. J Comp Physiol Psychol 62:171–183Google Scholar
  10. Douglas RJ (1972) Pavlovian conditioning and the brain. In: Boakes RA, Halliday MS (eds) Inhibition and Learning. Academic Press, London, pp 529–533Google Scholar
  11. Eckerman DA, Gordon WA, Edwards JD, Macphail RC, Gage MI (1980) Effects of scopolamine, phenobarbital and amphetamine on radial arm maze performance in the rat. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 12:595–602Google Scholar
  12. Evenden JL, Robbins TW (1983) Increased response switching, perseveration and perseverative switching following d-amphetamine in the rat. Psychopharmacology 80:67–73Google Scholar
  13. Fray PJ, Sahakian BJ, Robbins TW, Koob GF, Iversen SD (1980) An observational method for quantifying the behavioural effects of dopamine agonists: contrasting effects of d-amphetamine and apomorphine. Psychopharmacology 69:253–259Google Scholar
  14. Glanzer M (1953) Stimulus satiation: an explanation of spontaneous alternation and related phenomena. Psychol Rev 60:257–268Google Scholar
  15. Hannigan JH, Springer JE, Isaacson RL (1984) Differentiation of basal ganglia dopaminergic involvement in behavior after hippocampectomy. Brain Res 291:83–91Google Scholar
  16. Hinde RA (1970) Animal Behaviour. McGraw-Hill Kogakusha, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  17. Horvarth TB, Meares RA (1974) DOPA and arousal. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatr 37:416Google Scholar
  18. Hughes RN (1982) A review of atropinic drug effects on exploratory choice behavior in rodents. Behav Neurol Biol 34:5–41Google Scholar
  19. Jerussi TP, Glick SD (1974) Amphetamine induced rotation in rats without lesions. Neuropharmacology 13:283–285Google Scholar
  20. Kalivas PW, Widerlöv E, Stanley D, Breese G, Prange AJ (1983) Enkephalin action on the mesolimbic system: a dopamine-dependent and a dopamine-independent increase in locomotor activity. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 227:229–237Google Scholar
  21. Katz RJ, Schmaltz K (1981) Dopaminergic involvement in attention: a novel animal model. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol 4:585–590Google Scholar
  22. Kokkinidis L, Anisman H (1977) Perseveration and rotational behavior elicited by d-amphetamine in a Y-maze exploratory task: differential effects of intraperitoneal and unilateral intraventricular administration. Psychopharmacology 52:123–128Google Scholar
  23. Kokkinidis L, Anisman A (1978a) Abatement of stimulus perseveration following repeated d-amphetamine treatment: absence of behaviorally-augmented tolerance. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 8:557–563Google Scholar
  24. Kokkinidis L, Anisman H (1978b) Behavior-specific tolerance following chronic d- or-l-amphetamine treatment: lack of involvement of p-hydroxynorephedrine. Neuropharmacology 17:95–102Google Scholar
  25. Kokkinidis L, Anisman H (1980) Amphetamine models of paranoid schizophrenia: an overview and elaboration of animal experimentation. Psychol Bull 88:551–579Google Scholar
  26. Kokkinidis L, Anisman H (1981) Amphetamine psychosis and schizophrenia. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 5:449–461Google Scholar
  27. Livesey PJ, Livesey DJ, Syme GJ (1981) Spontaneous alternation in the white rat: a learning/memory phenomenon. Behav Neurol Biol 32:158–169Google Scholar
  28. Makanjuola ROA, Hill G, Dow RC, Campbell G, Ashcroft GW (1977) The effects of psychotropic drugs on exploratory and stereotyped behaviour of rats studied on a hole-board. Psychopharmacology 55:67–74Google Scholar
  29. Markowska A, Lukaszweska L (1981) Response to stimulus change following observation or exploration by the rat: differential effects of hippocampal damage. Acta Neurobiol Exp 41:325–338Google Scholar
  30. Meyerson BJ, Hoglund AU (1981) Exploratory and socio-sexual behaviour in the male laboratory rat: a methodological approach for the investigation of drug action. Acta Pharmacol Toxicol 48:168–180Google Scholar
  31. Montgomery KC (1954) The role of exploratory drive in learning. J Comp Physiol Psychol 47:60–64Google Scholar
  32. Norton S (1973) Amphetamine as a model for hyperactivity in the rat. Physiol Behav 11:181–186Google Scholar
  33. Oades RD (1981) Dopaminergic agonistic and antagonistic drugs in the ventral tegmentum of rats inhibit and facilitate changes of food search behaviour. Neurosci Lett 27:75–80Google Scholar
  34. Oades RD (1983) Limbic, neocortical and midbrain interactions on measures of attention and memory in the holeboard search task. Behav Res 8:261–262Google Scholar
  35. Oades RD (1985) The role of noradrenaline in tuning and dopamine in switching between signals in the CNS. Neurosci Biobehav Rev (in press)Google Scholar
  36. Robbins TW, Everitt BJ (1982) Functional studies of the central catecholamines. Int Rev Neurobiol 23:303–365Google Scholar
  37. Robbins TW, Koob GF (1980) Selective disruption of displacement behaviour by lesions of the mesolimbic dopamine system. Nature 285:409–412Google Scholar
  38. Simon H (1981) Neurones dopaminergiques A 10 et système frontal. J Physiol (Paris) 77:81–95Google Scholar
  39. Simon H, Scatton B, le Moal M (1980) Dopaminergic A 10 neurones are involved in cognitive functions. Nature 288:150–151Google Scholar
  40. Taghzouti K (1983) L'innervation dopaminergique du noyau accumbens et du septum: étude comportementale. Thesis 3 cycle, University of Bordeaux IIGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert Oades
    • 1
  • Khalid Taghzouti
    • 1
  • Hervé Simon
    • 1
  • Michel Le Moal
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratoire de Neurobiologie des ComportementUniversité de Bordeaux IIBordeaux Cedex

Personalised recommendations