Advertisement

Psychopharmacology

, Volume 64, Issue 1, pp 13–18 | Cite as

Effects of d-amphetamine and ethanol alone and in combination on schedule-controlled responding of pigeons

  • Jonathan L. Katz
  • James E. Barrett
Original Investigations

Abstract

Key pecking by pigeons was maintained under either a 5-min fixed-interval or a 30-response fixed-ratio schedule of food delivery. d-Amphetamine (0.1–1.0 mg/kg) either increased or did not affect overall rates of responding under the fixed-interval schedule; the lowest dose of ethanol (0.5 g/kg) did not affect or slightly decreased response rates, whereas higher doses (1.0–2.0 g/kg) substantially decreased rates. Combinations of low noneffective ethanol doses with most doses of d-amphetamine increased rates of responding under the fixed-interval schedule above those obtained with d-amphetamine alone; decreases produced by the higher doses of ethanol were attenuated by most doses of d-amphetamine. Doses of d-amphetamine (0.1–1.0 mg/kg) and ethanol (0.5–1.5 g/kg) alone generally had no effect on responding maintained under the fixed-ratio schedule; higher doses of these drugs decreased responding. The effects of dose combinations other than the highest ones generally differed little from those obtained with ethanol alone; the effects of high doses of each drug were antagonized by low to moderate doses of the other. Combinations of ethanol with d-amphetamine can result in higher rates of responding than are obtained with either drug alone. Further, effects of the drugs alone and in combination depend on the schedule under which behavior is maintained.

Key words

Ethanol d-Amphetamine Drug combinations Fixed interval Fixed ratio Schedules of reinforcement Operant behavior Pigeons 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barrett, J. E., Witkin, J. M.: Interaction of d-amphetamine with pentobarbital and chlordiazepoxide: Effects on punished and unpunished behavior of pigeons. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav. 5, 285–292 (1976)Google Scholar
  2. Branch, M. N.: Behavior as a stimulus: Joint effects of d-amphetamine and pentobarbital. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 189, 33–41 (1974)Google Scholar
  3. Dews, P. B.: Studies on behavior: IV. Stimulant actions of methamphetamine. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 122, 137–147 (1958)Google Scholar
  4. Dews, P. B., DeWeese, J.: Schedules of reinforcement. In: Handbook of psychopharmacology, Vol. 7, L. L. Iversen, S. D. Iversen, and S. H. Snyder, eds., pp. 107–150. New York: Plenum 1977Google Scholar
  5. Ferster, C. B., Skinner, B. F.: Schedules of reinforcement. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts 1957Google Scholar
  6. Katz, J. L., Barrett, J. E.: Effects of ethanol on behavior under fixedratio, fixed-interval, and multiple fixed-ratio fixed-interval schedules in the pigeon. Arch. Int. Pharmacodyn. Ther. 234, 88–96 (1978)Google Scholar
  7. Kelleher, R. T., Morse, W. H.: Determinants of the specificity of the behavioral effects of drugs. Ergeb. Physiol. 60, 1–56 (1968)Google Scholar
  8. Kissin, B.: Interactions of ethyl alcohol and other drugs. In: The biology of alcoholism, Vol. 3, B. Kissin and H. Begleiter, eds., pp. 109–161. New York: Plenum 1974Google Scholar
  9. Leander, J. D., McMillan, D. E., Ellis, F. W.: Ethanol and isopropanol effects on schedule-controlled responding. Psychopharmacology 47, 157–164 (1976)Google Scholar
  10. McMillan, D. E.: The effects of sympathomimetic amines on schedule-controlled behavior in the pigeon. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 160, 315–325 (1968)Google Scholar
  11. McMillan, D. E., Leander, J. D.: Effects of drugs on schedulecontrolled behavior. In: Behavioral pharmacology, S. D. Glick and J. Goldfarb, eds., pp. 85–139. St. Louis: Mosby 1976Google Scholar
  12. Rech, R. H., Vomachka, M. K., Rickert, D. E.: Interactions between depressants (alcohol-type) and stimulants (amphetamine-type). Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav. 8, 143–151 (1978)Google Scholar
  13. Rushton, R., Steinberg, H.: Dose-response relations of amphetamine-barbiturate mixtures. Nature 197, 1017–1018 (1963)Google Scholar
  14. Rushton, R., Steinberg, H., Tomkiewicz, M.: Effects of chlordiazepoxide alone and in combination with amphetamine on animal and human behavior. In: The benzodiazepines, S. Garattini, E. Sussini and L. O. Randall, eds., pp. 355–366. New York: Raven 1973Google Scholar
  15. Rutledge, C. O., Kelleher, R. T.: Interactions between the effects of methamphetamine and pentobarbital on operant behavior in the pigeon. Psychopharmacologia 7, 400–408 (1965)Google Scholar
  16. Sansone, M.: Effects of chlordiazepoxide, CNS stimulants and their combinations on avoidance behavior in mice. Arch. Int. Pharmacodyn. Ther. 215, 190–196 (1975)Google Scholar
  17. Smith, C. B.: Effects of d-amphetamine upon operant behavior of pigeons: enhancement by reserpine. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 146, 167–174 (1964)Google Scholar
  18. Smith, J. B.: Effects of d-amphetamine and pentobarbital in combination with single or repeated daily injections of morphine in the pigeon. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 206, 353–360 (1978)Google Scholar
  19. Wallgren, H., Barry, H.: Actions of alcohol, vol. II. Amsterdam: Elsevier 1970Google Scholar
  20. Weiss, B., Laties, V. G.: Effects of amphetamine, chlorpromazine, pentobarbital, and ethanol on operant response duration. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 144, 17–23 (1964)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1979

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jonathan L. Katz
    • 1
  • James E. Barrett
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations