These studies examined the roles of dopamine D1- and D2-like receptors within the nucleus accumbens (Acb) in the acquisition and expression of ethanol-induced (2 g/kg) conditioned place preference (CPP) in adult male DBA/2J mice. Bilateral intra-Acb infusions of the D1-like dopamine receptor antagonist SCH23390 (0.05, 0.5 µg/side) or the D2-like dopamine receptor antagonist raclopride (0.5–5.0 µg/side) were administered 30 min before each ethanol conditioning trial (acquisition studies) or before preference tests (expression studies). CPP was conditioned to tactile cues using an unbiased apparatus and procedure. Intra-Acb infusion of SCH23390 prevented CPP acquisition, whereas intra-Acb infusion of raclopride did not. Intra-Acb infusion of both antagonists, however, dose-dependently reduced ethanol-stimulated locomotor activity during conditioning. In contrast, intra-Acb antagonist infusion had no effect on ethanol CPP expression, suggesting that dopamine’s role in the Acb is limited to neurobiological processes engaged during the learning of the relationship between contextual cues and ethanol reward. Control experiments showed that intra-Acb injection of SCH23390 alone produced no place conditioning and did not interfere with the acquisition of conditioned place aversion induced by lithium chloride, suggesting that the antagonist’s effect on ethanol CPP was not due to a more general detrimental effect on associative learning. Overall, these data suggest that D1-like (but not D2-like) dopamine Acb receptors play an important role in the learning of context-ethanol associations, either by modulating the magnitude of ethanol reward or the rate of learning about ethanol reward.

Rationale Re-exposure to ethanol during acute withdrawal might facilitate the transition to alcoholism by enhancing the rewarding effect of ethanol. Objective The conditioned place preference (CPP) procedure was used to test whether ethanol reward is enhanced during acute withdrawal. Methods DBA/2J mice were exposed to an unbiased one-compartment CPP procedure. Ethanol (0.75, 1.0 or 1.5 g/kg IP) was paired with a distinctive floor cue (CS+), whereas saline was paired with a different floor cue (CS−). The Withdrawal (W) group received CS+ trials during acute withdrawal produced by a large dose of ethanol (4 g/kg) given 8 h before each trial. The No Withdrawal (NW) group did not experience acute withdrawal during conditioning trials, but was matched for acute withdrawal experience. Floor preference was tested in the absence of ethanol or acute withdrawal. Results All groups eventually showed a dose-dependent preference for the ethanol-paired cue, but development of CPP was generally more rapid and stable in the W groups than in the NW groups. Acute withdrawal suppressed the normal activating effect of ethanol during CS+ trials, but there were no group differences in test activity. Conclusions Acute withdrawal enhanced ethanol’s rewarding effect as indexed by CPP. Since this effect depended on ethanol exposure during acute withdrawal, the enhancement of ethanol reward was likely mediated by the alleviation of acute withdrawal, i.e., negative reinforcement. Enhancement of ethanol reward during acute withdrawal may be a key component in the shift from episodic to chronic ethanol consumption that characterizes alcoholism.