Several lines of alcohol-preferring and alcohol-nonpreferring rats have been developed using selective breeding based on 24-hr homecage ethanol consumption. However, it remains unclear if the selection based on two-bottle choice resulted in similar ethanol self-administration when measured using an operant procedure. In this paper, we compare our previous work using alcohol-accepting (AA) and alcohol-nonaccepting (ANA) rats with data obtained using the identical procedures in the (P) and (NP) rat lines, and both replicate lines of the high alcohol drinking (HAD1 and HAD2) and low alcohol drinking (LAD1 and LAD2) lines. All rats from each line were initiated to self-administer 10% ethanol using the sucrose fading procedure. After initiation, increasing concentrations of ethanol up to 30% ethanol were tested. The results indicated that only in the LAD1 and LAD2 lines was ethanol presentation not able to maintain lever pressing after initiation. Compared with the AA line, the P, HAD1, HAD2, and NP lines all self-administered more ethanol in the operant paradigm after initiation. The ANA line self-administered less ethanol than the AA line, but more than the LAD lines. Correlational analysis of homecage consumption with operant ethanol self-administration suggested that approximately 62% of the genetic variance in operant self-administration resulted from genes selected for the homecage drinking. At the same time, it was clear that there were genetic influences on operant self-administration that were not selected for by homecage ethanol drinking.

Several rat lines have been developed using preference/nonpreference and daily ethanol intake in the homecage as criteria for selective breeding. Using these lines, behavioral and neural factors that may underlie the genetic basis for the control of ethanol consumption have been examined. In this paper, we report data from eight of these selected lines: the Alcohol-Preferring (P) and Alcohol-Nonpreferring (NP), the Alcohol-Accepting (AA) and Alcohol-Nonaccepting (ANA), and the High Alcohol Drinking (HAD1 and HAD2) and Low Alcohol Drinking (LAD1 and LAD2) rats. All lines were tested using operant procedures and the same protocols for both the ethanol self-administration initiation and measurement of continuous-access ethanol consumption. During continuous access, the animals were housed in operant chambers with access to 10% (v/v) ethanol after responses on one lever, food pellets (45 mg) after responses on a second lever, and water in a drinking tube that was connected to a drinkometer circuit. Under these procedures, both similarities and differences among the selected lines on continuous-access operant ethanol intake were observed. For example, overall total homecage ethanol drinking was similar for the AA and both HAD lines. When examined in the operant continuous-access situation, however, the AA rats displayed a different consumption pattem, compared with the HAD lines. Data suggest that the frequency of drinking bouts was a primary factor in the phenotypic homecage selection of the preferring lines that was revealed by the use of the continuous-access operant procedure. In general, data suggest that genes related to ethanol preference and intake in homecage continuous-access situations may not be identical to those related to ethanol's reinforcing function in operant continuous-access conditions. Because ethanol consumption appears to be controlled by different drinking patterns across lines, the selected lines provide for a variety of models to understand how varying genotypes can impact ethanol consumption.

Ethanol-reinforced responding was initiated in male AA and ANA rats using the sucrose-substitution procedure. Before the initiation procedure, a homecage, two-bottle preference test was conducted. The rats were then trained to respond on an Fixed-Ratio 1 schedule with sucrose reinforcement. Over sessions, ethanol was added gradually to the sucrose solution as the concentration of sucrose was reduced until 10% ethanol (v/v) alone functioned as the reinforcer for lever pressing. The schedule of reinforcement was then increased to Fixed-Ratio 4. Next, the ethanol concentration presented as the reinforcer was increased over weeks to 15%, 20%, 30%, and then returned to 10%. A second homecage test was then performed. The results showed that the AA and ANA lines differed significantly on preference and intake (g/kg) during the homecage preference tests. There was a significant increase in preference during the second homecage test. During sucrose substitution, initial large differences in responding were observed between the lines. When the ethanol concentration was increased, intake (grams per kilogram) increased for the AA line but not for the ANA line. These effects were a function of no change in responding by the AA rats as concentration was increased and a decrease in responding by the ANA rats at the higher concentrations (20% and 30%). Taken together, data indicate that ethanol can function as a positive reinforcer for the behavior of AA and ANA rats. Even though 10% ethanol functioned as a reinforcer similarly for the two lines, ethanol intake in the AA line was significantly greater at the higher concentrations of ethanol, suggesting that ethanol functioned as a qualitatively different reinforcer for the AA rats, compared with the ANA rats.

In the following series of experiments, effects of morphine (0.1, 0.3, 1.0, 3.0, and 10.0 mg/kg) and naloxone (0.1, 0.3, and 1.0 mg/kg) were assessed in nondeprived rats trained to leverpress with 10% ethanol, sweetened ethanol, or 5% sucrose and water as the reinforcers. Morphine, at doses of 0.1, 0.3, and 1.0 mg/kg had little effect on responding with ethanol or sweetened ethanol available on a fixed ratio 4 (FR4) schedule of reinforcement, but at the 3.0 mg/kg dose, morphine suppressed responding to near zero. Similar results were obtained when 10% ethanol and water were available on a concurrent FR4 FR4 schedule of reinforcement. When 5% sucrose and water were available concurrently, morphine suppressed responding at 3.0 and 10 mg/kg. Naloxone (0.1, 0.3, and 1.0 mg/kg) decreased responding for ethanol, sweetened ethanol, and sucrose solutions in a dose-dependent manner. Naloxone decreased total number of responses/session by shortening the duration of responding without affecting momentary rate. Overall, the data suggest that the endogenous opioid system plays a role in the ability of ethanol to reinforce operant behavior. However, this role does not appear to be specific to ethanol because similar results were observed with sucrose reinforcement. Failure to find enhanced ethanol intakes following morphine injections in the operant situation suggests that the method used to measure ethanol self-administration makes a difference in assessing the effects of drugs on ethanol intake.