4.2 Article

Dose-Dependent Effects of Prefrontal Dopamine on Behavioral State in Rats

期刊

BEHAVIORAL NEUROSCIENCE
卷 126, 期 5, 页码 620-639

出版社

AMER PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1037/a0029640

关键词

working memory; biphasic effects; water maze; nociception; behavioral flexibility

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [IBN-9808865]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An inverted-U mechanism has been proposed to explain findings that both under- and overstimulation of dopamine (DA) receptors in medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) result in working memory impairments. Dopamine release in the mPFC is also associated with the mediation of other behavioral processes such as affective regulation, reward, and nociception. The present studies investigated mPFC DA dose-dependent effects on the performance of tasks that tap these other processes, including delayed alternation in the T maze for working memory, a water maze task for escape, the elevated plus maze for anxiolytic/anxiogenic effects, place preference conditioning for reward effects, the tail flick test for nociception, and a measure of locomotor activity for general arousal. Injection of 5 mu g of DA improved working memory, was anxiolytic in the plus maze, and increased pain sensitivity, but did not have any effects on water maze escape, place preference or locomotor activity. Doses of 10 mu g and 20 mu g impaired working memory and substantially decreased pain sensitivity, but did not affect plus maze behavior or locomotor activity. The 20-mu g dose also enhanced water maze escape. Taken together, these findings suggest a profile of two distinct behavioral states induced by low or high levels of mPFC DA: a low level facilitates foraging functions such as working memory and exploratory behaviors, with increased pain sensitivity, while higher levels facilitate stress-related adaptations, such as escape from threat and reduced pain sensitivity. These findings are concordant with behavioral flexibility views of mPFC DA functions.

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

4.2
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