4.5 Article

A comparative study on the effects of the benzodiazepine midazolam and the dopamine agents, apomorphine and sulpiride, on rat behavior in the two-way avoidance test

期刊

PHARMACOLOGY BIOCHEMISTRY AND BEHAVIOR
卷 92, 期 2, 页码 351-356

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pbb.2009.01.001

关键词

Dopamine; Apomorphine; Sulpiride; Midazolam; Avoidance; Fear; Anxiety

资金

  1. FAPESP [06/06354-5]
  2. CNPq [472030/2007-8]
  3. CAPES
  4. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP) [06/06354-5] Funding Source: FAPESP

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In recent years. studies in behavioral pharmacology have shown the involvement of dopaminergic mechanisms in avoidance behavior as assessed by the two-way active avoidance test (CAR). Changes in dopaminergic transmission also occur in response to particularly threatening challenges. However, studies on the effects of benzodiazepine (BZD) drugs ill this test are still unclear. Given the interplay of dopamine and other neurotransmitters in the neurobiology of anxiety and schizophrenia the aim of this work was to evaluate the effects of systemic administration of midazolam, the dopaminergic agonist apomorphine, and the D-2 receptor antagonist sulpiride using the CAR, a test that shows good sensitivity to typical neuroleptic drugs. Whereas midazolam did not alter the avoidance response. apomorphine increased and sulpiride reduced them in this test. Escape was not affected by any drug treatments. Heightened avoidance was not associated with the increased motor activity caused by apomorphine. In contrast with the benzodiazepine midazolam, activation of post-synaptic D-2 receptors with apomorphine facilitates, whereas the D-2 receptor antagonism with sulpiride inhibited the acquisition of the avoidance behavior. Together, these results bring additional evidence for a role of D-2 mechanisms in the acquisition of the active avoidance. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据