Ethanol preexposure attenuates the interaction of ethanol and cocaine in taste aversion learning

Grakalic, Ivana; Riley, Anthony L.

doi:10.1016/s0091-3057(02)00726-8

Cited by 15 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results of this third experiment failed to show either additivity or attenuation with the combined injection of a 2 mg/kg dose of amphetamine and a 4 ml/kg dose of 0.15 M LiCl. This finding is consistent with a recent report that failed to find evidence for additivity between ethanol-and cocaine-induced suppression of CS intake in male Sprague-Dawley rats (Busse, Verendeev, Jones, & Riley, 2005), but differs from earlier reports that did find evidence of such additive effects in female Long-Evans rats (Etkind, Fantegrossi, & Riley, 1998;Grakalic & Riley, 2002). The failure to find additive effects in the present study may have been due to floor effects.…”

supporting

confidence: 88%

“…Post hoc Newman–Keuls tests found that, while neither the sucrose nor the morphine US suppressed intake of the saccharin cue when presented separately, ps > .05, intake of the saccharin cue was significantly reduced compared with intake by the saccharin-saline + saccharin controls when the two morphine and sucrose USs were presented in combination, p < .05. Several additional studies are needed to fully address this issue of additivity but, the very least, these results show that the suppressive effects of a sweet can be additive with those of a drug of abuse and the suppressive effects of a drug of abuse can (Etkind et al, 1998; Grakalic & Riley, 2002), in some circumstances, be additive with those of an aversive agent. Thus, we must test Huang and Hsiao’s basic assumption that the suppressive effects of a sweet will reduce, rather than augment, the suppressive effects of an aversive agent, like LiCl.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The state of the reward comparison hypothesis: Theoretical comment on Huang and Hsiao (2008).

Grigson¹

2008

Behavioral Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rats avoid intake of a gustatory cue following pairings with a drug of abuse, such as morphine or cocaine. Despite the well-established rewarding properties of these drugs, the reduction in intake of the taste cue has been interpreted as a conditioned taste aversion for decades. In 1997, I proposed the reward comparison hypothesis suggesting that rats avoided intake of the drug-associated taste cue because the value of the taste cue pales in comparison to the highly rewarding drug of abuse expected in the near future. In this issue of Behavioral Neuroscience, A.C.W. Huang and S. Hsiao (2008) challenge the reward comparison hypothesis by showing parallels between amphetamine and LiCl-induced suppression of CS intake. This commentary addresses the current state of the reward comparison hypothesis in the context of the experiments completed by Huang and Hsiao and their new task-dependent drug effects hypothesis.

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 88%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The state of the reward comparison hypothesis: Theoretical comment on Huang and Hsiao (2008).

Grigson¹

2008

Behavioral Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These data are important because a similar preexposure regimen increases oral ethanol consumption (self‐administration) in these mice, a strain that typically avoids oral consumption of ethanol 69 . In addition, ethanol preexposure has no effect on ethanol‐ or cocaine/ethanol‐induced place conditioning 121 but does attenuate CTAs induced by both of these conditions 126 . These results provide evidence that the aversive and rewarding effects of a drug are most likely independent mechanisms that can be modulated separately to influence later behavior.…”

Section: Drug History and Taste Aversion Learningmentioning

confidence: 98%

Conditioned taste aversion learning

Davis

Riley

2010

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drugs of abuse are typically discussed in terms of their rewarding effects and how these effects mediate drug taking. However, these drugs produce aversive effects that could have an important role in the overall acceptability of a drug and its likelihood of being self-administered. Rewarding and aversive effects, then, could be interpreted as separate behavioral effects, with the balance of the two determining overall drug acceptability. Interestingly, the role of aversive effects on drug acceptability in the self-administration preparation has received limited attention in this context. This chapter examines the aversive effects of drugs and discusses their role in drug taking. If these aversive effects serve a protective function, manipulations that alter or decrease these effects could have implications for drug taking. Several factors have been reported to alter conditioned taste aversion (CTA) learning, a preparation used in the assessment of the aversive effects of drugs in general. Two of these factors, drug history and strain, are reviewed here. By reviewing these, we intend to demonstrate the protective nature of aversive effects in the initiation and escalation of drug taking and to provide evidence that reductions in aversive effects could produce changes in patterns of drug self-administration that could lead to an increased vulnerability to abuse drugs by altering the reward-aversion balance. The aim of this chapter is not to question the importance of rewarding effects in self-administration but rather to provide evidence that aversive effects are an important factor that needs to be considered in discussions of drug-taking behavior.

show abstract