JPET Introducing ALZET?ew Model 2006 Pump

Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Winter, J. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Winter, J. C.
Journal of Pharmacology And Experimental Therapeutics, Vol. 189, Issue 3, 741-747, 1974
Copyright © 1974 by American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics


THE EFFECTS OF 3,4-DIMETHOXYPHENYLETHYLAMINE IN RATS TRAINED WITH MESCALINE AS A DISCRIMINATIVE STIMULUS

J. C. Winter 1

1 Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, School of Medicine, State University of New York at Buffalo, New York

It is known that the effects of mescaline (3,4,5-trimethoxyphenylethylamine), a hallucinogen, can function as a discriminative stimulus. The present investigation examined the ability of 3,4-dimethoxyphenylethylamine (DMPEA), a non-hallucinogen, to substitute for mescaline in animals previously trained with mescaline and saline. Subjects were first trained on a variable interval schedule of positive reinforcement Two treatment conditions, mescaline hydrochloride (10 mg/kg) and saline, were then assigned to each animal. One treatment was SD, the stimulus in whose presence responses were reinforced, and the other treatment was SDgr, the stimulus in whose presence no responses were reinforced. After approximately 10 sessions in which the drug treatments were alternated on successive days, a punishment contingency was added, i.e., in the presence of SDgr, responses were punished by the delivery of electric shock. The efficacy of the drug treatments as discriminative stimuli was established in test sessions in which responses were neither punished nor reinforced. Subsequent administration of a range of doses of DMPEA to subjects in which saline functioned as SD and mescaline as SDgr revealed that a dose of 10 to 30 mg/kg of DMPEA was equivalent to the training dose of mescaline. However, the same range of doses, when tested in subjects in which mescaline was SD did not result in responding appropriate for the mescaline condition. Subsequently, direct comparisons of DMPEA and mescaline were made by substituting DMPEA for saline 1) in subjects previously trained with mescaline and saline and 2) in a second group which had previously received neither drugs nor behavioral training. Discriminated responding developed rapidly in both groups. The present results suggest that DMPEA cannot substitute for mescaline in a discriminative task and that comparable doses of the two drugs are discriminable in rats.

Submitted on July 2, 1973
Accepted on February 21, 1974







Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
All ASPET Journals Molecular Pharmacology Pharmacological Reviews
 Molecular Interventions Drug Metabolism and Disposition

Copyright © 1974 by the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics.