Rats were trained to discriminate nicotine from saline in a two-bar operant conditioning procedure with food reinforcement. There was partial generalization to the nicotine analogues anabasine and cytisine in rats trained to discriminate either 0.2 or 0.4 mg/kg nicotine from saline. However, generalization was complete in rats trained to discriminate 0.1 mg/kg nicotine and, in a novel procedure, any one of three doses of nicotine (0.1, 0.2, or 0.4 mg/kg). There was no generalization to the muscarinic-cholinergic agonist oxotremorine (0.0025-0.04 mg/kg). Additional experiments were carried to further characterize the response of rats trained with nicotine (0.1 mg/kg). These animals failed to generalize to compounds from a range of pharmacological classes (i.e., apomorphine, cocaine, chlordiazepoxide, picrotoxin, and quipazine), but there was partial generalization to amphetamine. Mecamylamine (0.5 mg/kg) but not hexamethonium (5.0 mg/kg) blocked the discrimination of nicotine and the generalization to cytisine. Anabasine (1.0-4.0 mg/kg) did not block the response to nicotine. The results support the view that the nicotine cue is mediated mainly through central cholinergic mechanisms. The dose of nicotine used for training has a very significant influence on the characteristics of the cue and 0.1 mg/kg of nicotine may be more suitable than 0.4 mg/kg as a training dose in future work.

The influence of the nicotine antagonist dihydro-beta-erythroidine (DH beta E) was examined on various behavioural effects of nicotine in rats. Motor activity was recorded in photocell cages whereas discriminative stimulus effects were examined using two-lever drug discrimination procedures with a tandem schedule of food reinforcement (n = 8 throughout). DH beta E (0.1-3.2 mg/kg) failed to antagonise the decreases in motor activity that nicotine (0.4-0.6 mg/kg) produced in experimentally naive rats, whereas mecamylamine (1.5 mg/kg) completely blocked this effect of nicotine. DH beta E (0.1-3.2 mg/kg) antagonised the increases in motor activity that nicotine (0.4 mg/kg) produced in rats with extensive previous exposure to both nicotine and the photocell apparatus. In rats trained to discriminate either 0.1 or 0.4 mg/kg nicotine from saline, DH beta E (0.1-3.2 mg/kg) blocked the discriminative stimulus effect of nicotine. The block of the discriminative effect could be reversed by increasing the dose of nicotine; DH beta E (1.6 mg/kg) shifted the dose-response curve for nicotine discrimination to the right by a factor of 9.4. In addition, nicotine in doses of 0.32-0.64 mg/kg decreased the overall rate of lever pressing but DH beta E (1.6 mg/kg) did not influence the dose-response curve for this effect. Thus, DH beta E potently blocked the locomotor activating and discriminative stimulus effects of nicotine at doses that did not antagonise its locomotor depressant and operant response rate-reducing effects. This selective blockade supports the involvement of different subtypes of nicotinic receptor in the mediation of diverse behavioural effects. Furthermore, the rightward shift of the dose-response curve for nicotine discrimination suggested a competitive mode of action for DH beta E.

Rats were trained to discriminate nicotine (0.4 mg/kg SC) from saline in a standard two-bar operant conditioning procedure with food reinforcement. The response to nicotine was dose-related and at the ED50 of 0.14 mg/kg, plasma nicotine concentrations were similar to those reported previously for cigarette smokers who inhale. The nicotine analogues anabasine and cytisine increased nicotine-appropriate responding in a dose-related manner. Animals predominantly responded on the saline-associated lever when administered drugs from a range of pharmacological classes, even at doses that were sufficiently large to reduce the overall numbers of responses. The results confirm that the nicotine discriminative stimulus is highly specific. Previous work has shown anabasine and cytisine to be active at nicotinic-cholinergic binding sites in rat brain. The finding that there is some correlation between the behavioural effects of these compounds and their actions at the nicotine binding site may indicate that the nicotine cue is mediated through a cholinergic receptor.

The effects of nicotine and related compounds on locomotor activity were compared in experimentally naive rats and in animals chronically exposed to nicotine and the photocell test chambers. In experimentally naive rats, all nicotinic compounds decreased locomotion in a dose-related manner and the rank order of potency was (-)-nicotine > (+)-nornicotine > (+)-nicotine > cytisine > lobeline > anabasine. Mecamylamine attenuated the locomotor depressant effects of most of the agonists, except lobeline. In rats previously exposed to nicotine and the test apparatus for several weeks, (-)-nicotine increased locomotor activity in a dose-related manner, with a maximal increase to 400% of baseline at a dose of 0.4 mg/kg. One or more doses of (+)-nicotine, (+)-nornicotine and anabasine also increased locomotor activity in these animals, although the maximal effects seen were in all cases less than the maximal effect of (-)-nicotine. Cytisine and lobeline failed to increase locomotor activity at any dose tested. These conclusions were not altered by consideration of the time-courses for the effects of the different drugs. Thus, the results confirm that the locomotor stimulant and depressant effects of nicotine can be dissociated from each other, a finding that may be explained by differences in their actions at nicotinic receptors.

Behavioural effects of d- and l-nicotine, d- and l-nornicotine and l-cotinine were studied in two paradigms. In experiment 1, rats responded under a multiple fixed-interval (FI) 5 min, fixed-ratio (FR) 20 schedule of food presentation. Aside from differences in potency and time course, l-nicotine and the stereoisomers of nornicotine produced qualitatively similar effects on rates of responding. With increasing doses of drugs, FI response rates first increased and then decreased, while FR response rates only decreased. In contrast, d-nicotine did not significantly increase FI response rates at lower doses, and only decreased FI and FR response rates at higher doses. At doses up to 100 mg/kg, cotinine produced only dose-dependent increases in FI response rates and had no effect on FR response rates. Rate-increasing effects of cotinine were not blocked by mecamylamine. In experiment 2, rats were trained to discriminate between l-nicotine (0.1 mg/kg SC) and saline (0.1 ml/kg SC) in a two-bar, operant conditioning procedure under a tandem variable-interval (VI) 1 min, FR 10 schedule of food presentation. Full generalization was obtained to d-nicotine and to l- and d-nornicotine. Generalization to cotinine occurred only with large doses that contained significant amounts of nicotine present as an impurity. There was no generalization to non-nicotinic drugs (morphine and clenbuterol), even at doses that reduced response rates.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)