Effects of rat strain and method of inducing ethanol drinking on Pavlovian-Instrumental-Transfer with ethanol-paired conditioned stimuli.

R J Lamb, Brett C Ginsburg, Alexander Greig, Charles W Schindler
Author Information
  1. R J Lamb: Department of Psychiatry, San Antonio, TX 78229-3900, United States. Electronic address: lamb@uthscsa.edu.
  2. Brett C Ginsburg: Department of Psychiatry, San Antonio, TX 78229-3900, United States.
  3. Alexander Greig: Department of Psychiatry, San Antonio, TX 78229-3900, United States.
  4. Charles W Schindler: Designer Drug Unit, Intramural Research Program, National Institute on Drug Abuse, 251 Bayview Blvd., Baltimore, MD 21224, United States.

Abstract

Ethanol-paired conditioned stimuli (CSs) are widely thought to invigorate ethanol responding, and thus, precipitate relapse to drinking. However, preclinical studies investigating this issue using Pavlovian-Instrumental-Transfer (PIT) procedures have had mixed results, with some studies finding PIT while others did not. The studies failing to show PIT used Lewis rats and induced ethanol drinking using a post-prandial drinking procedure. The present experiments examined whether either of these two variables influenced the magnitude of PIT observed. In the first experiment, ethanol drinking in Lewis rats was induced using either sucrose fading or post-prandial drinking. In the second experiment, ethanol drinking was induced using post-prandial drinking in either Long-Evans Hooded or Lewis rats. In both experiments, rats were trained to respond for ethanol under a random interval schedule. Subsequently with the lever removed, 2-min light presentations were paired with ethanol deliveries. Finally, with the lever returned, the effect of light presentations on responding was tested while responding was in extinction. Light presentations similarly affected responding in Lewis rats regardless of the method of drinking induction. Likewise, light presentations similarly affected responding in both Lewis and Long-Evans Hooded rats. Neither ethanol induction method nor rat strain affected the magnitude of PIT observed, and thus, neither likely explains previous failures to observe PIT with ethanol-maintained behavior.

Keywords

References

  1. Pavlov J Biol Sci. 1976 Oct-Dec;11(4):222-36 [PMID: 1033507]
  2. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 1989 Summer-Fall;13(2-3):135-40 [PMID: 2682399]
  3. Behav Brain Res. 2006 May 15;169(2):320-4 [PMID: 16527365]
  4. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2013 Jun;37(6):1033-9 [PMID: 23278190]
  5. Am J Psychiatry. 1948 Nov;105(5):329-38 [PMID: 18890902]
  6. Learn Behav. 2004 Nov;32(4):463-76 [PMID: 15825887]
  7. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2007 May;31(5):766-74 [PMID: 17378919]
  8. Alcohol. 2016 Dec;57:15-27 [PMID: 27916139]
  9. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2003 Oct;27(10):1592-8 [PMID: 14574229]
  10. J Stud Alcohol. 2005 Jan;66(1):53-61 [PMID: 15830903]
  11. Behav Anal. 1994 Fall;17(2):261-85 [PMID: 22478192]
  12. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2016 May;233(10):1921-32 [PMID: 26564234]
  13. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2008 Feb;196(3):397-405 [PMID: 17965977]
  14. Psychol Rev. 1984 Apr;91(2):251-68 [PMID: 6571424]
  15. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2014 Jan;231(2):447-53 [PMID: 24026484]
  16. Behav Neurosci. 2001 Oct;115(5):1086-92 [PMID: 11584921]
  17. Science. 1983 Apr 22;220(4595):431-3 [PMID: 6836286]
  18. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1983 Jul;9(3):225-47 [PMID: 6153052]
  19. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2002 Oct;163(3-4):327-44 [PMID: 12373434]
  20. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2013 Apr 1;129(1-2):94-101 [PMID: 23122598]
  21. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. 2009 Apr;19(4):238-49 [PMID: 18990547]
  22. J Exp Anal Behav. 1977 Nov;28(3):221-31 [PMID: 411869]
  23. Front Behav Neurosci. 2015 Mar 03;9:54 [PMID: 25784867]
  24. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2007 Jun;192(2):231-41 [PMID: 17265074]
  25. Physiol Behav. 2002 May 1;76(1):117-29 [PMID: 12175595]
  26. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2012 Feb;219(3):751-61 [PMID: 21766171]
  27. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 1981;75(2):134-43 [PMID: 6798603]
  28. Behav Neurosci. 2012 Oct;126(5):681-9 [PMID: 22866668]
  29. Front Psychiatry. 2016 Oct 10;7:169 [PMID: 27777560]
  30. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2016 May;233(10):1933-44 [PMID: 26800688]
  31. Br J Pharmacol. 2014 Oct;171(20):4636-72 [PMID: 24749941]
  32. Alcohol. 2019 Sep;79:47-57 [PMID: 30641121]
  33. Psychol Rev. 1967 Jan;74(1):71-80 [PMID: 5341445]
  34. J Exp Anal Behav. 2015 Mar;103(2):405-18 [PMID: 25766452]

Grants

  1. R01 AA012337/NIAAA NIH HHS
  2. R01 AA025664/NIAAA NIH HHS

MeSH Term

Alcohol Drinking
Animals
Conditioning, Classical
Conditioning, Operant
Ethanol
Extinction, Psychological
Rats
Rats, Inbred Lew
Rats, Long-Evans
Self Administration
Sucrose
Transfer, Psychology

Chemicals

Ethanol
Sucrose

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0drinkingethanolPITratsrespondingLewisusingpresentationsstudiesinducedpost-prandialeitherlightaffectedmethodconditionedstimulithusPavlovian-Instrumental-TransferexperimentsmagnitudeobservedexperimentLong-EvansHoodedleversimilarlyinductionratstrainbehaviorEthanol-pairedCSswidelythoughtinvigorateprecipitaterelapseHoweverpreclinicalinvestigatingissueproceduresmixedresultsfindingothersfailingshowusedprocedurepresentexaminedwhethertwovariablesinfluencedfirstsucrosefadingsecondtrainedrespondrandomintervalscheduleSubsequentlyremoved2-minpaireddeliveriesFinallyreturnedeffecttestedextinctionLightregardlessLikewiseNeitherneitherlikelyexplainspreviousfailuresobserveethanol-maintainedEffectsinducingethanol-pairedAlcoholismCravingEthanolself-administrationOperantRelapse

Similar Articles

Cited By