The differential effect of haloperidol and repetitive induction on four immobility responses in mouse and guinea pig.

The modification by haloperidol and repetitive induction on four immobility responses -- tonic immobility, cataleptic immobility, immobility by clamping the neck and dorsal immobility -- were compared in mice and guinea pigs. Without drug, three out of four responses (cataleptic, neck clamp and dorsal immobility) were induced in mice; guinea pigs displayed all four responses. Haloperidol (5 mg/kg i.p.) potentiated the three responses shown by mice, but did not potentiate the four responses in guinea pigs. In both undrugged and haloperidol-treated mice, only the cataleptic immobility response was potentiated by repetition. In guinea pigs, none of the four immobility responses was affected due to repetition, haloperidol or a combination of both. These data are discussed, considering that, although these immobility responses could be mediated by the same neurotransmitters (e.g. dopamine), they are possibly expressed in a differential manner as a function of the kind of stimulus used to trigger the response, characteristics of the species and, in some immobility responses such as cataleptic immobility, as a function of their interaction with habituation or another learning-like process.

Potentiation of the immobility response elicited by bandaging and clamping in mesencephalic rats.

In earlier work, we showed that adult rats exhibit immobility response (IR) if a clamp is fastened to the skin of the nape of the neck, but not at other areas of the body, and not by bandaging. The present study characterizes IR in adult rats with complete mesencephalic transections. In the mesencephalic rats, the duration of the IR not only increased, but the stimuli capable of eliciting it were more diverse. All head and body areas clamped or bandaged were capable of inducing a profound IR. In contrast, the IR in intact rats was of shorter duration, and was only induced by clamping the neck, or by bandaging the upper or the lower torso. Furthermore, unlike the mesencephalic rats the ability of the bandaging to induce IR is reduced after the first trial and finally disappears. Only clamping the neck was able to persistently induce IR in intact rats. These data support the hypothesis that the IR control system is in the midbrain, hindbrain or spinal cord, and that systems above the mesencephalon modulate the IR. Such modulation appears to involve the ability to discriminate amongst tactile stimuli, and to integrate previous experience.

Effects of catecholamines on water intake in rats.

It is known that intraperitoneally (IP) injected adrenaline (A) inhibits food intake in otherwise hungry animals. In a recent work, Hinton et al. (6) showed that IP A also inhibits water intake in thirsty rats, concluding that A's effect is unspecific. We administered A IP or intramuscularly (IM) in different doses in rats made thirsty either by 18-h water deprivation or by subcutaneous injection of hypertonic saline or polyethylene glycol. IP A reduced water intake in all experimental conditions. A dose-related inhibition was observed in water-deprived animals. On the other hand, IM A showed a small effect only at the highest dose (50 micrograms/100 g body weight). When some of these experiments were repeated using noradrenaline (NA) and isoproterenol (IS), IM administration of either substance showed no effect. IP administration reduced water intake significantly only at the highest dose of NA (50 micrograms/100 g). It is concluded that water intake inhibition by catecholamines in rats made thirsty either by osmotic or by volumetric challenges is of porto-hepatic origin and, in contrast with food intake inhibition, has no beta-adrenergic component.

Adrenaline anorexia blocked by alpha and beta adrenergic antagonists in 24-h fasted rats.

The effect of alpha and beta adrenergic blockers, phentolamine (PH) and propranolol (PR), on the anorexia induced by intraperitoneal (i.p.) adrenaline (A) was studied in 24 h-fasting male and female adult Wistar rats. I.p. PH elicited a small but significant increase in food intake in both males and females. The combination of PH + PR completely blocked the anorexia elicited by i.p. A in both males and females. In females, PH and PR alone partially blocked A-induced anorexia. In males, PH had no significant effect on A-induced anorexia but PR blocked it completely. It was concluded that the relative participation of alpha and beta adrenergic receptors in A-induced anorexia seems to depend on the sex of the rat, at least for the doses used in the present study: in females, alpha and beta actions seem to be approximately equal, while in males the beta is predominant.