Psychopharmacology

, Volume 82, Issue 3, pp 215–220 | Cite as

Differences in the stereotypy response but not the hypomotility response to apomorphine in the roman high and low avoiding strains of rats

  • M. J. Durcan
  • D. W. Fulker
  • I. C. Campbell
Original Investigations

Abstract

Two experiments were carried out to investigate differences in the behavioural responses to “high” and “low” doses of apomorphine in two strains of rats selectively bred for high and low avoidance on a two-way active avoidance task: the Roman High and Low Avoiders. Significant strain differences were found in the stereotypy resulting from a high dose of apomorphine (2 mg/kg s.c.). In a second experiment no strain differences were, however, apparent for the hypomotility produced by low doses of the drug (0.05 mg/ kg s.c.). Pretreatment with a low dose of apomorphine had no effect on the stereotypy response when the animals were subsequently retested with the high dose. These results may indicate differential sensitivities of dopamine receptors in these strains.

Key words

Apomorphine Dopamine Stereotypy Hypomotility Roman High and Low Avoiders Genetics Dopamine receptors Rats 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Al-Ani AT, Tunnicliffe G, Rick JT, Kerkut GA (1970) GABA production, acetylcholinesterase activity and biogenic amine levels in brain for mouse strains differing in spontaneous activity and reactivity. Life Sci 9:21–27Google Scholar
  2. Baker H, Tong JH, Reis DJ (1980) Genetic control of midbrain dopaminergic neurons in inbred strains of mice: Relationship to size and neuronal density of the striatum. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 77:4369–4373Google Scholar
  3. Bignami G (1965) Selection for high rates and low rates of avoidance conditioning. Anim Behav 13:221–227Google Scholar
  4. Boehme RE, Ciaranello RD (1981) Dopamine receptor binding in inbred mice: Strain differences in mesolimbic and nigrostriatal dopamine binding sites. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 78: 3255–3259Google Scholar
  5. Carlsson A (1975) Receptor-mediated control of dopamine metabolism. In: Usdin E, Bunny WE (eds) Pre-and post-synaptic receptors. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 49–63Google Scholar
  6. Costall B, Marsden CD, Naylor RJ, Pycock CJ (1977) Stereotyped behaviour patterns and hyperactivity induced by amphetamine and apomorphine after discrete 6-OHDA lesions of extrapyramidal and mesolimbic nuclei. Brain Res 123:89–111Google Scholar
  7. Costentin J, Protais P, Schwartz JC (1975) Rapid and dissociated changes in sensitivities of different dopamine receptors in mouse brain. Nature 257:405–407Google Scholar
  8. Creese I, Iversen SD (1973) Blockage of amphetamine induced motor stimulation and stereotypy in the adult rat following neonatal treatment with 6-hydroxydopamine. Brain Res 55: 369–382Google Scholar
  9. Driscoll P, Dedek J (1983) Regional 5-HT, DA and NA metabolism in Roman High-and Low Avoidance rats (RHA/Verh and RLA/Verh) after MAO-Inhibition (Abstract). Neurosci Lett (in press)Google Scholar
  10. Ernst AM (1965) Relationship between the action of dopamine and apomorphine and their O-methylated derivatives upon the CNS. Psychopharmacologia 7:391–399Google Scholar
  11. Goodale DB, Rustelholz DB, Long JP, Flynn JR, Walsh B, Cannon JG, Lee T (1980) Neurochemical and behavioural evidence for a selective pre-synaptic dopamine receptor agonist. Science 210:1141–1143Google Scholar
  12. Iversen SD (1977) Brain dopamine systems and behaviour. In: Iversen LL, Iversen SD, Snyder SH (eds) Handbook of psychopharmacology, vol 8. Plenum Press, New York, London, pp 333–384Google Scholar
  13. Kelly PH, Seviour PW, Iversen SD (1975) Amphetamine and apomorphine responses in the rat following 6-OHDA lesions of the nucleus accumbens, septi and corpus striatum. Brain Res 94:507–522Google Scholar
  14. Kempf E, Greilsamer J, Mack G, Mandel P (1974) Correlation of behavioural differences in 3 strains of mice with differences in brain amines. Nature 247:483–485Google Scholar
  15. Maxwell AE (1958) Experimental design in psychology and the medical sciences. Methuen, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. Oliverio A, Castellano C (1977) Postnatal brain maturation and learning in the mouse. In: Oliverio A (ed) Genetics, environment and intelligence. Elsevier/North Holland, Amsterdam, pp 117–131Google Scholar
  17. Robbins TW (1977) A critique of the methods available for the measurement of spontaneous motor activity. In: Iversen LL, Iversen SD, Snyder SH (eds) Handbook of psychopharmacology, vol 7. Plenum Press, New York, London, pp 37–82Google Scholar
  18. Sansone M, Ammassari-Geule M, Renzi P, Oliverio A (1981) Different effects of apomorphine on locomotor activity in C57 BL/6 and DBA/2 mice. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 14:741–743Google Scholar
  19. Seiden LS, Peterson DD (1968) Reversal of the reserpine-induced suppression of the conditioned avoidance response by l-Dopa: Correlation of behavioural and biochemical differences in two strains of mice. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 159:422–428Google Scholar
  20. Seigel S (1956) Non parametric statistics. McGraw Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Severson JA, Randall PK, Finch CE (1981) Genotypic influences on striatal dopaminergic regulation in mice. Brain Res 210:201–215Google Scholar
  22. Vetulani J, Sansone M, Oliverio A (1982) Analysis of the difference in the behavioural effects of apomorphine in C57 BL/6 and DBA/2 mice. Pharmacol Biochem and Behav 17:967–971Google Scholar
  23. Watanabe H, Nakano S, Ogawa N (1982) Age differences in apomorphine-induced stereotypy in rats: Relationship to plasma and brain concentrations. Psychopharmacology 76: 57–61Google Scholar
  24. Wilcock J, Fulker DW, Broadhurst PL (1981) Analysis of two-way escape-avoidance conditioning measures from a diallel cross of eight strains of rats. Behav Genet 11:339–358Google Scholar
  25. Wilks SS (1935) The likelihood test of independence in contingency tables. Ann Math Stat 6:190–196Google Scholar
  26. Wolf MD, Wilcox RE, Riffee WH, Abraham LD (1980) Strain differences in dopamine receptor function and the initiation of movement. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 15:5–7Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. J. Durcan
    • 1
  • D. W. Fulker
    • 1
  • I. C. Campbell
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyInstitute of PsychiatryLondonUK
  2. 2.Department of BiochemistryInstitute of PsychiatryLondonUK

Personalised recommendations