Distinct effects of ventral tegmental area NMDA and acetylcholine receptor blockade on conditioned reinforcement produced by food-associated cues.

Stimuli paired with rewards acquire reinforcing properties to promote reward-seeking behavior. Previous work supports the role of ventral tegmental area (VTA) nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs) in mediating conditioned reinforcement elicited by drug-associated cues. However, it is not known whether these cholinergic mechanisms are specific to drug-associated cues or whether VTA cholinergic mechanisms also underlie the ability of cues paired with natural rewards to act as conditioned reinforcers. Burst firing of VTA dopamine (DA) neurons and the subsequent phasic DA release in the nucleus accumbens (NAc) plays an important role in cue-mediated behavior and in the ability of cues to acquire reinforcing properties. In the VTA, both AChRs and N-methyl-d-aspartate receptors (NMDARs) regulate DA burst firing and phasic DA release. Here, we tested the role of VTA nAChRs, muscarinic AChRs (mAChRs), and NMDARs in the conditioned reinforcement elicited by a food-associated, natural reward cue. Subjects received 10 consecutive days of Pavlovian conditioning training where lever extension served as a predictive cue for food availability. On day 11, rats received bilateral VTA infusion of saline, AP-5 (0.1 or 1µg), mecamylamine (MEC: 3 or 30µg) or scopolamine (SCOP: 3 or 66.7µg) immediately prior to the conditioned reinforcement test. During the test, nosepoking into the active (conditioned reinforced, CR) noseport produced a lever cue while nosepoking on the inactive (non-conditioned reinforced, NCR) noseport had no consequence. AP-5 robustly attenuated conditioned reinforcement and blocked discrimination between CR and NCR noseports at the 1-µg dose. MEC infusion decreased responding for both CR and NCR while 66.7-µg SCOP disrupted the subject's ability to discriminate between CR and NCR. Together, our data suggest that VTA NMDARs and mAChRs, but not nAChRs, play a role in the ability of natural reward-associated cues to act as conditioned reinforcers.

Ventral tegmental area cholinergic mechanisms mediate behavioral responses in the forced swim test.

Recent studies revealed a causal link between ventral tegmental area (VTA) phasic dopamine (DA) activity and pro-depressive and antidepressant-like behavioral responses in rodent models of depression. Cholinergic activity in the VTA has been demonstrated to regulate phasic DA activity, but the role of VTA cholinergic mechanisms in depression-related behavior is unclear. The goal of this study was to determine whether pharmacological manipulation of VTA cholinergic activity altered behavioral responding in the forced swim test (FST) in rats. Here, male Sprague-Dawley rats received systemic or VTA-specific administration of the acetylcholinesterase inhibitor, physostigmine (systemic; 0.06 or 0.125mg/kg, intra-cranial; 1 or 2µg/side), the muscarinic acetylcholine receptor (AChR) antagonist scopolamine (2.4 or 24µg/side), or the nicotinic AChR antagonist mecamylamine (3 or 30µg/side), prior to the FST test session. In control experiments, locomotor activity was also examined following systemic and intra-cranial administration of cholinergic drugs. Physostigmine administration, either systemically or directly into the VTA, significantly increased immobility time in FST, whereas physostigmine infusion into a dorsal control site did not alter immobility time. In contrast, VTA infusion of either scopolamine or mecamylamine decreased immobility time, consistent with an antidepressant-like effect. Finally, the VTA physostigmine-induced increase in immobility was blocked by co-administration with scopolamine, but unaltered by co-administration with mecamylamine. These data show that enhancing VTA cholinergic tone and blocking VTA AChRs has opposing effects in FST. Together, the findings provide evidence for a role of VTA cholinergic mechanisms in behavioral responses in FST.

The vesicular monoamine transporter (VMAT-2) inhibitor tetrabenazine induces tremulous jaw movements in rodents: implications for pharmacological models of parkinsonian tremor.

Tetrabenazine (TBZ) is a reversible inhibitor of vesicular monoamine storage that is used to treat Huntington's disease. TBZ preferentially depletes striatal dopamine (DA), and patients being treated with TBZ often experience parkinsonian side effects. The present studies were conducted to investigate the ability of TBZ to induce tremulous jaw movements (TJMs), which are a rodent model of parkinsonian tremor, and to determine if interference with adenosine A2A receptor transmission can attenuate TJMs and other motor effects of TBZ. In rats, TBZ (0.25-2.0mg/kg) significantly induced TJMs, which primarily occurred in the 3.0-7.5-Hz frequency range. The adenosine A2A antagonist MSX-3 (1.25-10.0mg/kg) significantly attenuated the TJMs induced by 2.0mg/kg TBZ in rats, and also significantly reduced the display of catalepsy and locomotor suppression induced by TBZ. In mice, TBZ (2.5-10.0mg/kg) dose dependently induced TJMs, and adenosine A2A receptor knockout mice showed significantly fewer TJMs compared to wild-type controls. MSX-3 (2.5-10.0mg/kg) also significantly reduced TBZ-induced TJMs in CD1 mice. To provide a cellular marker of these pharmacological conditions, we examined c-Fos expression in the ventrolateral neostriatum (VLS). TBZ (2.0mg/kg) significantly increased the number of c-Fos-positive cells in the VLS, which is indicative of reduced DA D2 receptor transmission, and 10.0mg/kg MSX-3 significantly attenuated the TBZ-induced c-Fos expression. These results indicate that TBZ induces tremor as measured by the TJM model, and that pharmacological antagonism and genetic deletion of adenosine A2A receptors are capable of attenuating this oral tremor.

The novel cannabinoid CB1 antagonist AM6545 suppresses food intake and food-reinforced behavior.

Drugs that interfere with cannabinoid CB1 transmission suppress food-motivated behaviors, and may be useful clinically as appetite suppressants. However, there may also be undesirable side effects (e.g., nausea, malaise, anxiety, and depression) that are produced by the current generation of CB1 inverse agonists such as rimonabant and taranabant. For that reason, it is important to continue research on novel cannabinoid antagonists. The present studies examined the effects of the novel compound AM6545, which is a neutral antagonist of CB1 receptors that is thought to have relatively poor penetrability into the central nervous system. Intraperitoneal administration of AM6545 significantly reduced food-reinforced operant responding at doses of 4.0, 8.0 and 16.0 mg/kg. AM6545 also produced a strong suppression of the intake of high-carbohydrate and high-fat diets in the same dose range, but only produced a mild suppression of lab chow intake at the highest dose (16.0 mg/kg). Although AM6545 did not affect food handling, it did reduce time spent feeding and feeding rate. Taken together, these results suggest that AM6545 is a compound that warrants further study as a potential appetite suppressant drug.

Differential effects of selective adenosine antagonists on the effort-related impairments induced by dopamine D1 and D2 antagonism.

Mesolimbic dopamine (DA) is a critical component of the brain circuitry regulating behavioral activation and effort-related processes. Rats with impaired DA transmission reallocate their instrumental behavior away from food-reinforced tasks with high response requirements, and instead select less effortful food-seeking behaviors. Previous work showed that adenosine A(2A) antagonists can reverse the effects of DA D(2) antagonists on effort-related choice. However, less is known about the effects of adenosine A(1) antagonists. Despite anatomical data showing that A(1) and D(1) receptors are co-localized on the same striatal neurons, it is uncertain if A(1) antagonists can reverse the effects DA D(1) antagonists. The present work systematically compared the ability of adenosine A(1) and A(2A) receptor antagonists to reverse the effects of DA D(1) and D(2) antagonists on a concurrent lever pressing/feeding choice task. With this procedure, rats can choose between responding on a fixed ratio 5 lever-pressing schedule for a highly preferred food (i.e. high carbohydrate pellets) vs. approaching and consuming a less preferred rodent chow. The D(1) antagonist ecopipam (0.2 mg/kg i.p.) and the D(2) antagonist eticlopride (0.08 mg/kg i.p.) altered choice behavior, reducing lever pressing and increasing lab chow intake. Co-administration of the adenosine A(1) receptor antagonists 8-cyclopentyl-1,3-dipropylxanthine (DPCPX; 0.375, 0.75, and 1.5 mg/kg i.p.), and 8-cyclopentyltheophylline (CPT; 3.0, 6.0, 12.0 mg/kg i.p.) failed to reverse the effects of either the D(1) or D(2) antagonist. In contrast, the adenosine A(2A) antagonist KW-6002 (0.125, 0.25 and 0.5 mg/kg i.p.) was able to produce a robust reversal of the effects of eticlopride, as well as a mild partial reversal of the effects of ecopipam. Adenosine A(2A) and DA D(2) receptors interact to regulate effort-related choice behavior, which may have implications for the treatment of psychiatric symptoms such as psychomotor slowing, fatigue or anergia that can be observed in depression and other disorders.

Nucleus accumbens and effort-related functions: behavioral and neural markers of the interactions between adenosine A2A and dopamine D2 receptors.

Nucleus accumbens dopamine (DA) is a critical component of the brain circuitry regulating work output in reinforcement-seeking behavior and effort-related choice behavior. Moreover, there is evidence of an interaction between DA D(2) and adenosine A(2A) receptor function. Systemic administration of adenosine A(2A) antagonists reverses the effects of D(2) antagonists on tasks that assess effort related choice. The present experiments were conducted to determine if nucleus accumbens is a brain locus at which adenosine A(2A) and DA D(2) antagonists interact to regulate effort-related choice behavior. A concurrent fixed ratio 5 (FR5)/chow feeding procedure was used; with this procedure, rats can choose between completing an FR5 lever-pressing requirement for a preferred food (i.e., high carbohydrate operant pellets) or approaching and consuming a freely available food (i.e., standard rodent chow). Rats trained with this procedure spend most of their time pressing the lever for the preferred food, and eat very little of the concurrently available chow. Intracranial injections of the selective DA D(2) receptor antagonist eticlopride (1.0, 2.0, 4.0 microg) into nucleus accumbens core, but not a dorsal control site, suppressed FR5 lever-pressing and increased consumption of freely available chow. Either systemic or intra-accumbens injections of the adenosine A(2A) receptor antagonist MSX-3 reversed these effects of eticlopride on effort-related choice. Intra-accumbens injections of eticlopride also increased local expression of c-Fos immunoreactivity, and this effect was attenuated by co-administration of MSX-3. Adenosine and DA systems interact to regulate instrumental behavior and effort-related processes, and nucleus accumbens is an important locus for this interaction. These findings may have implications for the treatment of psychiatric symptoms such as psychomotor slowing, anergia and fatigue.

Intracerebroventricular administration of cannabinoid CB1 receptor antagonists AM251 and AM4113 fails to alter food-reinforced behavior in rats.

RATIONALE: Drugs that interfere with cannabinoid CB1 transmission suppress food-motivated behaviors and may be useful as appetite suppressants, but there is uncertainty about the locus of action for the feeding-suppression effects of these drugs. OBJECTIVE: The present work was conducted to determine if two drugs that interfere with cannabinoid receptor transmission, AM251 and AM4113, have effects on food-reinforced behavior after administration into the lateral ventricle (intracerebroventricular (ICV)). RESULTS: Although systemic administration of both drugs can suppress food-reinforced behavior, neither AM251 (40, 80, and 160 microg) nor AM4113 (60, 120, and 240 microg) administered at various times prior to testing produced any suppression of food-reinforced operant responding on a fixed-ratio 5 schedule. Because the modulation of locomotion by drugs that act on CB1 receptors is hypothesized to be a forebrain effect, these drugs also were assessed for their ability to reverse the locomotor suppression produced by the CB1 agonist AM411. ICV administration of either AM251 or AM4113 reversed the locomotor suppression induced by the CB1 agonist AM411 in the same dose range that failed to produce any effects on feeding. CONCLUSIONS: This indicates that both AM4113 and AM251, when administered ICV, can interact with forebrain CB1 receptors and are efficacious on forebrain-mediated functions unrelated to feeding. These results suggest that CB1 neutral antagonists or inverse agonists may not be affecting food-reinforced behavior via interactions with forebrain CB1 receptors located in nucleus accumbens or hypothalamus and that lower brainstem or peripheral receptors may be involved.