“…Thus this model allows for tolerance and dependence to be separable. Moreover, since the antiopioids probably have different neuroanatomical distri- (Kastin et al, 1984) (Galina and Kastin, 1987) Dynorphin (1-13) attenuates P-endorphin Dynorphin (1-13) exhibits mu-antagonist actions in (Friedman et al, 1981) (Holaday et al, 1986) antinociception endotoxemic shock, fluorthyl-induced seizures, and DADL-induced increases in striatal CAMP Spinal dynorphin (1-17) acts as a n anti-analgesic Dynorphin (1-17) attenuated morphine-and (Fujimoto and Arts, 1990;Fujimoto et al, 1990a,bJ (Sheldon et al, 1989 normorphin-induced contractions of the rat urinary bladder Dynorphin mediates in part the tolerance produced by a single large dose of morphine Dynorphin may oppose the rewarding effects of morphine Pfeiffer et al, 1986) (Fujimoto and Holmes, 1990;Sofuoglu and Takemori, (Di Chiara and Imperato, 1988a,b;Kurnor et al, 1986; (Dourish et al, 1990;Faris et al, 1983) (Dourish et al, 1990) (Itoh and Katsuura, 1981) (Bhargava et al, 1983;Holaday et al, 1978) (Bhargava et al, 1983;Holaday et al, 1978) (Bhargava et al, 1983) (Bhargava et al, 1983) dependence hypothermia and catalepsy morphine-induced antinociception @-endorphin (1-31) p-Endorphin (1-27) Antagonizes @-endorphin (1-33 J antinociception Nicolas et al, 1984) butions, the model clearly allows for tolerance and dependence to be anatomically separable. As pointed out by Smith et al (19881, a n anti-opioid model which postulates the existence of AOP which do not bind to opioid receptors, cannot explain the high degrees of tolerance which can be achieved.…”