Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Sep;236(9):2835-2846.
doi: 10.1007/s00213-019-05264-6. Epub 2019 May 16.

Conditioned stimuli affect ethanol-seeking by female alcohol-preferring (P) rats: the role of repeated-deprivations, cue-pretreatment, and cue-temporal intervals

Affiliations

Conditioned stimuli affect ethanol-seeking by female alcohol-preferring (P) rats: the role of repeated-deprivations, cue-pretreatment, and cue-temporal intervals

Sheketha R Hauser et al. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2019 Sep.

Abstract

Rationale: Evidence indicates that drug-paired stimuli can evoke drug-craving leading to drug-seeking and repeated relapse periods can influence drug-seeking behaviors.

Objectives: The present study examined (1) the effect of an interaction between repeated deprivation cycles and excitatory conditioning stimuli (CS+) on ethanol (EtOH)-seeking; (2) the effects of EtOH-paired cue-exposure in a non-drug-paired environment on subsequent conditioning in a drug-paired environment; and (3) the temporal effects of conditioned cues on subsequent EtOH-seeking.

Methods: Adult female alcohol-preferring (P) rats were exposed to three conditioned odor cues; CS+ associated with EtOH self-administration, CS- associated with the absence of EtOH (extinction training), and a neutral stimulus (CS0) presented in a neutral non-drug-paired environment. The rats underwent four deprivation cycles or were non-deprived, following extinction they were maintained in a home cage for an EtOH-free period, and then exposed to no cue, CS+, CS-, or CS0 to assess the effect of the conditioned cues on EtOH-seeking behavior.

Results: Repeated deprivations enhanced and prolonged the duration of CS+ effects on EtOH-seeking. Presentation of the CS- in a non-drug-paired environment blocked the ability of a CS+ to enhance EtOH-seeking in a drug-paired environment. Presentation of the CS+ or CS- in a non-drug-paired environment 2 or 4 h earlier significantly altered EtOH-seeking.

Conclusion: Results indicated an interaction between repeated deprivation cycles and CS+ resulted in a potentiation of CS+ evoked EtOH-seeking. In addition, a CS- may have therapeutic potential by providing prophylactic protection against relapse behavior in the presence of cues in the drug-using environment.

Keywords: Alcohol relapse; Alcohol-preferring (P) rats; Drug deprivation; Drug relapse; Drug-craving; Drug-seeking.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1:
Figure 1:
Depicts the experimental timelines for the Non-Deprived and Repeated Deprivation.
Figure 2:
Figure 2:
Depicts the experimental timelines for the Non-Deprived and Repeated Deprivation cycles with conditioned cues prior (pretreatment) to PSR EtOH-seeking and during PSR EtOH-seeking.
Figure 3:
Figure 3:
Depicts the experimental timelines for temporal experiments with conditioned cues.
Figure 4:
Figure 4:
Depicts the mean (± SEM) responses on the lever previously associated with the delivery of EtOH for the Repeated Deprivation (Rep-Dep) and Non-Deprived (ND) groups. Fig. 4A; Asterisk (*) indicates that rats in the CS+ groups responded significantly more than the No Odor groups for Rep-dep group during PSR sessions 1–4 and for ND group during session 1–3 (p <0.05). Plus (+) indicates that rats in the ND No Odor (PSR session 1), ND CS+ (PSR session 1–3) , Rep-Dep No Odor (PSR session 1 −2), and Rep-Dep CS+ (PSR sessions 1–4) groups responded significantly more on the lever previously associated with EtOH during PSR testing than extinction baseline (Ext Base) (p <0.05). Fig. 4B; Depicts the mean (±S.E.M.) responses per 10-min blocks on the lever previously associated with the delivery of EtOH in the ND No Odor group, ND CS+ group, Rep-Dep No Odor group, and Rep-Dep CS+ group during the first PSR session. Asterisk (*) indicates rats in the Rep-Dep CS+ group responded significantly (p < 0.05) more on the EtOH lever during the 1st, 2nd and 4th 10-min blocks of PSR testing compared to all other groups. Pound (#) indicates that the ND No Odor and Rep-Dep No Odor groups responded significantly (p < 0.05) more on the EtOH lever during the 6th 10-min block compared to the ND CS+ and the Rep-Dep CS+ groups.
Figure 5:
Figure 5:
Depicts the mean (±S.E.M.) responses on the lever previously associated with the delivery of EtOH in Repeatedly Deprived (Rep-Dep) P rats that were exposed to CS+, CS0, and CS- in the non-drug paired environment then tested for PSR expression in the presence of CS+ (Fig. 5A) or CS- (Fig. 5B) in drug-paired environment. Fig. 5A; Asterisk (*) indicates that Rep-Dep rats, exposed to CS+ in the non-drug paired environment, responded significantly more than the CS0 and CS- during sessions 1–3, and the CS0 group responses were significantly higher than CS- during sessions 1–3 (p <0.05). Plus (+) indicates that Rep-Dep rats lever responding was significantly greater than extinction baseline (p <0.05) for CS+ and CS0 groups during PSR sessions 1–3 and CS- rats lever responding was significantly lower than extinction baseline (Ext Base) (p <0.05) during PSR session 2–3. Fig. 5B; There were no significant differences found for any of the groups.
Figure 6:
Figure 6:
Depicts the mean (±S.E.M.) responses per session on the lever previously associated with the delivery of EtOH in Non–Deprived (ND) P rats that were exposed to CS+, CS0 and CS- in the non-drug paired environment then tested for PSR expression in the presence of CS+ (Fig. 6A) or CS- (Fig. 6B) in the drug-paired environment. Fig. 6A; Asterisk (*) indicates CS+ group was responding more than the CS0 and No Odor groups during PSR session 1 (p < 0.05). The CS0 and No Odor responded more than the CS- group during PSR session 1 (p < 0.05). Pound (#) indicates that during the 2nd PSR test session responding in rats pretreated with the CS+ responded more than the No Odor group which responded more than the CS0 and CS- groups (p < 0.05). Dagger (†) indicates that during the 3rd PSR test session, rats pretreated with the CS+ responded more than all other groups (p < 0.05). Plus (+) indicates that rats lever responding was significantly greater than extinction baseline (Ext Base) (p <0.05) for CS+ during PSR sessions 1–3, CS0 during PSR session 1, and for No Odor group during PSR session 1–2 (p <0.05). Fig. 6B; Asterisk (*) indicates that CS+ responding was less than the CS0 and CS- during PSR session 1 (p < 0.05).
Figure 7.
Figure 7.
Depicts the mean (±S.E.M.) responses on the lever previously associated with the delivery of EtOH in P rats that were exposed to CS+ CS0 and CS- in the non-drug paired environment then tested for PSR expression in the absence of CS in the drug-paired environment following a 2, 4 and 8- hour delay. Upper Panel: The asterisks (*) indicates that during the 1st and 2nd PSR sessions, the 2-hour delay CS+ group responding on the lever previously associated with EtOH was significantly higher than the 2-hour CS0 and 2-hour CS- groups (p < 0.05). The 2-hour CS0 responding on the lever previously associated with EtOH was significantly higher than CS- group (p < 0.05). In addition, the 2-hour CS+ group lever responding was greater for the 1st and 2nd PSR sessions compared to extinction baseline (Ext Base), while the CS0 2-hour group lever responding was only significant for the PSR session 1 compared to extinction baseline (p <0.05). Middle Panel: The asterisks (*) indicates that, during the 1st PSR session, the 4-hour delay CS+ group responded significantly more than the 4-hour CS0 and 4-hour CS- groups (p < 0.05). The 4-hour CS0 responding on the lever previously associated with EtOH was significantly higher CS- group (p < 0.05). In addition, the 4-hour CS+ and CS0 group lever responding was greater for the 1st PSR sessions compared to extinction baseline (Ext Base) (p <0.05). Lower Panel: There were no significant differences found for any of the groups following the 8-hour delay.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Bell RL, Hauser SR, Liang T, Sari Y, Maldonado-Devincci A, Rodd ZA (2017) Rat animal models for screening medications to treat alcohol use disorders. Neuropharmacology 122:201–243 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bell RL, Hauser S, Rodd ZA, Liang T, Sari Y, McClintick J, Rahman S, Engleman EA (2016) A Genetic Animal Model of Alcoholism for Screening Medications to Treat Addiction. Int Rev Neurobiol 126:179–261 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bell RL, Sable HJ, Colombo G, Hyytia P, Rodd ZA, Lumeng L (2012) Animal models for medications development targeting alcohol abuse using selectively bred rat lines: neurobiological and pharmacological validity. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 103:119–55 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bouton ME, Todd TP, Vurbic D, Winterbauer NE (2011) Renewal after the extinction of free operant behavior. Learn Behav 39:57–67 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bouton ME (2004) Context and behavioral processes in extinction. Learn Mem 11:485–94 - PubMed