1996
DOI: 10.1097/00008877-199601000-00008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Gustatory preference-aversion profiles for saccharin, quinine and alcohol in Roman high- and low-avoidance lines

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
18
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4
4
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In keeping with this hypothesis, reinstatement of drugseeking behavior following non-contingent cocaine injections was more robust in RHA than RLA rats. Intriguingly, previous studies on ethanol and saccharin intake using a two-bottle free choice paradigm have shown that, compared with RLA rats, RHA rats display a higher preference for both ethanol and saccharin solutions over water (Razafimanalina et al, 1996;Fernández-Teruel et al, 2002). These findings suggest that the line-related differences in the responsiveness to cocaine SA observed in the present study may also extend to the voluntary intake of other drugs of abuse or natural reinforcers, although further studies are required to establish whether the line-related behavioral differences reported herein indeed reflect a higher motivation for cocaine in RHA vs RLA rats.…”
Section: Figurementioning
confidence: 82%
“…In keeping with this hypothesis, reinstatement of drugseeking behavior following non-contingent cocaine injections was more robust in RHA than RLA rats. Intriguingly, previous studies on ethanol and saccharin intake using a two-bottle free choice paradigm have shown that, compared with RLA rats, RHA rats display a higher preference for both ethanol and saccharin solutions over water (Razafimanalina et al, 1996;Fernández-Teruel et al, 2002). These findings suggest that the line-related differences in the responsiveness to cocaine SA observed in the present study may also extend to the voluntary intake of other drugs of abuse or natural reinforcers, although further studies are required to establish whether the line-related behavioral differences reported herein indeed reflect a higher motivation for cocaine in RHA vs RLA rats.…”
Section: Figurementioning
confidence: 82%
“…RHA rats show higher levels of exploratory behavior in tests of novelty seeking when compared to RLA rats (Escorihuela et al 1999;Fernández-Teruel et al 1997Guitart-Masip et al 2006a). Concerning animal models of divergent vulnerability to drug addiction, RHA rats have so far shown enhanced preference for alcohol and other rewarding substances (Razafimanalina et al 1996;Corda et al 2001;Fernández-Teruel et al 2002), as well as greater behavioral sensitization to morphine (Piras et al 2003), cocaine (Giorgi et al 2005b), and amphetamine (Corda et al 2005;Giorgi et al 2005a) when compared to RLA rats. We recently showed that RHA-I rats show higher D 3 receptor binding in the shell of the nucleus accumbens than RLA-I rats, whereas rats of the latter strain show higher D 3 binding in the Calleja Islands than RHA rats (Guitart-Masip et al 2006b).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this regard, the sublines of Roman high‐ (RHA) and low‐avoidance (RLA) rats, psychogenetically selected for, respectively, rapid vs. extremely poor two‐way active avoidance acquisition (Driscoll & Bättig, 1982), appear to be a valid laboratory model of divergent novelty‐ and substance‐seeking profiles , as well as of differential central DAergic activity in a wide range of experimental situations (reviewed by Driscoll et al ., 1998). Thus, compared with RLA/Verh rats, RHA/Verh rats show: (i) higher levels of exploratory behaviour in tests of novelty seeking (Fernández‐Teruel et al ., 1992, 1997a, 2002; Escorihuela et al ., 1999); (ii) higher preference for alcohol (Driscoll et al ., 1990; Razafimanalina et al ., 1996; Corda et al ., 2001), as well as saccharin and quinine solutions (Razafimanalina et al ., 1996; Fernández‐Teruel et al ., 2002); (iii) stronger mesocortical and mesolimbic dopaminergic responses to, respectively, stress (D'Angio et al ., 1988; Giorgi et al ., 2003) and addictive substances, including EtOH (Giorgi et al ., 1997, 2005; Corda et al ., 2001). Moreover, RHA/Verh rats are less sensitive than RLA/Verh rats to the hypnotic effects of alcohol (Fernández‐Teruel et al ., 1997b).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%