Research ArticleNEUROPHARMACOLOGY

Individual Differences in Cocaine-Induced Locomotor Sensitization in Low and High Cocaine Locomotor-Responding Rats Are Associated with Differential Inhibition of Dopamine Clearance in Nucleus Accumbens

Jilla Sabeti, Greg A. Gerhardt and Nancy R. Zahniser
Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics April 2003, 305 (1) 180-190; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1124/jpet.102.047258

Abstract

Behavioral sensitization to cocaine reflects neuroadaptive changes that intensify drug effects. However, repeated cocaine administration does not induce behavioral sensitization in all male Sprague-Dawley rats. Because cocaine inhibits the dopamine (DA) transporter (DAT), we investigated whether altered DAT function contributes to these individual differences. Freely moving rats had electrochemical microelectrode/microcannulae assemblies chronically implanted in the nucleus accumbens so that exogenous DA clearance signals were recorded simultaneous with behavior. The peak DA signal amplitude (Amax) and efficiency of clearance (k) were used as indices of in vivo DAT function. Low and high cocaine responders (LCRs and HCRs, respectively) were identified based on their locomotor responsiveness to an initial injection of cocaine (10 mg/kg i.p.). Consistent with DAT inhibition, cocaine elevated Amax and reducedk in HCRs, but not in LCRs. The same dose of cocaine was administered for six additional days and after a 7-day withdrawal. Baseline behavioral and dopamine clearance indices were unaltered by repeated cocaine or after withdrawal. Only LCRs expressed cocaine-induced sensitized locomotor activation, and this was accompanied by cocaine-induced elevations inAmax and reductions in k. These sensitized responses to cocaine persisted in LCRs after withdrawal. In contrast, neither locomotor nor electrochemical responses were altered by repeated saline administration or a saline challenge after repeated cocaine administration, suggesting that conditioning did not significantly contribute. Our results suggest that increased DAT inhibition by cocaine is associated with locomotor sensitization and that DAT serves as a common substrate for mediating both the initial and sensitized locomotor responsiveness to cocaine.

Repeated administration of psychomotor stimulants, such as cocaine and amphetamine, has been used as an experimental paradigm to model the progression of behavioral and neurochemical changes leading to compulsive drug use in addicts. Repeated stimulant administration often results in behavioral sensitization, a progressive increase in responsiveness to drug. Sensitization in rats is manifested as augmented locomotor activity and stereotypic behaviors, as well as self-administration and drug-seeking behaviors (Robinson and Berridge, 1993; Covington and Miczek, 2001; De Vries et al., 2001; Vezina et al., 2002). Thus, it is important to understand the neurobiological changes induced by repeated stimulant administration because they likely contribute to intensification of drug motivation and/or craving that promote relapse in addicts (Robinson and Berridge, 1993).

Cocaine potentiates dopamine (DA) signaling in mesocorticolimbic reward pathways by inhibiting uptake of DA by the DA transporter (DAT). With repeated administration, the responsiveness of DA systems to stimulants is enhanced in behaviorally sensitized rats (Vanderschuren and Kalivas, 2000). Transient increases in somatodendritic DA release and spontaneous firing activity of DA neurons in the ventral tegmental area have been associated with the induction of behavioral sensitization, whereas long-lasting alterations within DA neuronal terminal fields have been associated with its expression (Vanderschuren and Kalivas, 2000; Nestler, 2001; Everitt and Wolf, 2002). Initially, reduced sensitivity of inhibitory DA D2-autoreceptors may result in the potentiated cocaine-induced increases in extracellular DA concentrations in nucleus accumbens (NAc; Vanderschuren and Kalivas, 2000). However, the D2-autoreceptor changes seem to be transient, whereas the ability of a cocaine challenge to produce a greater augmentation in NAc DA levels persists. This suggests that other mechanisms must underlie the long-lasting changes in DA neuronal function.

Because cocaine blocks DAT, repeated cocaine may regulate DAT expression/activity. However, whether it does is controversial (Izenwasser and Cox, 1990; Ng et al., 1991; Cass et al., 1993a;Masserano et al., 1994; Meiergerd et al., 1994; Zahniser et al., 1995;Kuhar and Pilotte, 1996; Zahniser and Doolen, 2001; Chefer and Shippenberg, 2002). Discrepancies may result from differences in strains/individuals, drug administration/withdrawal paradigms, and/or assays used. We have combined high-speed chronoamperometry with local applications of DA to measure dynamic changes in extracellular DA concentrations after acute and repeated cocaine administration (Cass et al., 1993a; Zahniser et al., 1999; Sabeti et al., 2002b). Using this approach in striatum of drug-naı̈ve rats, we have demonstrated that the decay or clearance of locally applied DA primarily reflects in vivo DAT activity and that diffusion makes a more minor contribution to cessation of the DA signals (Cass et al., 1993b; Sabeti et al., 2002a,b). Furthermore, we observed cocaine-induced changes consistent with behavioral sensitization: greater cocaine-induced inhibition of exogenous DA clearance in NAc of anesthetized rats withdrawn from repeated cocaine administration, compared with rats given the same dose acutely (Cass et al., 1993a). This finding was consistent with reports of decreased DAT binding sites (but see Cass et al., 1993a; Pilotte et al., 1994; Wilson et al., 1994; Boulay et al., 1996; Letchworth et al., 1999) and increased cocaine potency (Lee et al., 1998) after repeated cocaine treatment. However, because the rats were anesthetized for the clearance measurements (Cass et al., 1993a), it was impossible to relate cocaine-induced regulation of DAT function with individual behavioral changes. This relationship was further complicated by the fact that not all male Sprague-Dawley rats exhibit behavioral sensitization with repeated cocaine administration (Cass et al., 1993a).

Greater locomotor activity in a novel environment predicts enhanced vulnerability to behavioral sensitization induced by repeated amphetamine (Bardo et al., 1996; Piazza and Le Moal, 1996; Cools and Gingras, 1998), although this relationship may not generalize to cocaine (Djano and Martin-Iverson, 2000; Sutton et al., 2000). High-novelty responding rats also exhibit higher DA release (Bardo et al., 1996; Piazza and Le Moal, 1996; Cools and Gingras, 1998) and firing rates of ventral tegmental area DA neurons (Marinelli and White, 2000). We have found that greater acute inhibition of DA clearance is correlated with high initial locomotor responsiveness to cocaine (Sabeti et al., 2002b). However, it is unclear whether this association extends to cocaine-induced locomotor sensitization.

To determine whether long-lasting adaptations in DAT function contribute to cocaine-induced locomotor sensitization, we simultaneously recorded behavior and DA clearance in NAc of freely moving rats over a 2-week period. We then 1) compared the time course of changes in behavior and DA clearance and 2) correlated individual variations in the magnitude of sensitization with initial cocaine-induced locomotor activation and with basal and cocaine-induced changes in DA clearance.

Materials and Methods

Animals.

Outbred male Sprague-Dawley rats were obtained from Charles Rivers Laboratory (Sasco, Omaha, NE). Before surgeries, rats were housed no more than six per cage with a 12-h light/dark cycle and unrestricted access to food and water. To habituate rats to handling and the insertion of injector tubing on experimental days, rats were handled for 1 to 2 days before surgery and before each recording session. After surgery, rats were housed individually. All animal care procedures followed the National Institutes of Health Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals and were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee at the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center.

Stereotaxic Implantation of Recording Microelectrode/Microcannulae Assemblies.

Procedures for the construction and implantation of recording microelectrode/microcannulae assemblies have been previously described in detail (Gerhardt et al., 1999; Sabeti et al., 2002a,b). Briefly, microelectrodes were fabricated from a single carbon fiber (fiber diameter, 30 μm; exposed length, 150–300 μm; Textron Systems, Wilmington, MA) that was coated with Nafion (5% solution; Aldrich Chemical Co., Milwaukee, WI). They were calibrated in vitro as described previously. Microelectrodes displayed a DA over ascorbic acid selectivity of ≥1000:1 and linear responses to DA (1–6 μM) in vitro. Each microelectrode was assembled onto two stainless steel guide microcannulae, which permitted the delivery of KCl or DA from injectors that were inserted before each recording session. Injectors were fabricated from fused silica tubing (40 μm i.d. × 150 μm o.d.; Polymicro Technologies, Phoenix, AZ). Insertion of the injector through the guide positioned the tip of the injector precisely within 250 to 350 μm from the exposed tip of the carbon fiber microelectrode.

For implantation of the microelectrode/microcannulae assembly, rats were deeply anesthetized with chloral hydrate, as described previously (Sabeti et al., 2002b). The assembly was then lowered stereotaxically into the core of the NAc (anterior-posterior, +1.2–1.5 mm from bregma; medial-lateral, 2.2 mm left from the midline; dorsal-ventral, 6.5–7.5 mm below surface; Sabeti et al., 2002b). A Ag/AgCl reference microelectrode (0.011-inch diameter; A-M Systems, Carlsborg, WA) was implanted into the posterior cerebral cortex. Leads from the recording and reference microelectrodes were soldered to a four-pin modular telephone connector and encased in heat shrink tubing (flexible polyolefin; 1/16 inch expanded; 1/32 inch recovered; JT&T Products, San Jose, CA). To ensure that the recording microelectrode was situated at a site densely innervated by DA terminals, as opposed to the anterior commissure, KCl (120 mM in 29 mM NaCl and 2.5 mM CaCl2, pH 7.4; 300–800 nl) was infused through the injector to stimulate DA release, which was measured using high-speed chronoamperametry (see below; Hebert and Gerhardt, 1998;Sabeti et al., 2002a,b). Once an appropriate recording microelectrode placement was verified, the entire assembly was cemented in place using dental cement, a thick layer of Quick Set Epoxy (Duro; Loctite Corporation, Rocky Hill, CT), and five small screws in the skull as anchors. Except during recording sessions, dummy injectors were inserted through the guide microcannulae to prevent obstruction.

Treatment Protocol and Timeline of Simultaneous Behavioral and Electrochemical Recordings.

Three to five days after implantation of the microelectrode/microcannulae assembly, each rat was transferred from its home cage to an open field activity apparatus (16 × 16 × 15 inches; San Diego Instruments, San Diego, CA; enclosed inside a 2 × 2 × 2-foot Faraday cage). On this day (day 0), initial behavioral and electrochemical responses in the activity apparatus and to a saline injection (1 ml/kg i.p.) were examined in all of the rats. Subsequently, rats were divided into two groups (Table1). On days 1 to 6, once daily injections of either saline (control group) or (−)-cocaine HCl (10 mg/kg i.p.; experimental group) were administered. On day 7, both groups were injected with cocaine. Rats in the control group continued to be injected with cocaine for five more days and then were injected with saline on the 7th day. After a 7-day withdrawal in the experimental group, cocaine was administered on day 15. All injections were given in the activity apparatus. The data on days 0 and 1 from rats in the experimental group have been previously presented (Sabeti et al., 2002b) and are included in the mean values reported here.

View this table:
Table 1

Treatment groups

On recording days (days 0, 1, 3, 5, 7, and 15; Table 1), rats were acclimated to the activity apparatus for 1 h. During this period, rats were handled momentarily while new injectors were inserted through the guide microcannulae in preparation for the repeated application of DA into NAc. Next, “baseline” measurements of behavior and DA clearance signals were recorded for 30 min immediately before the i.p. injection of either saline or cocaine. Thus, rats had acclimated to the activity apparatus for a total of 1.5 h before the saline or cocaine injection. After injection, data were collected for an additional 60 min. Room lights were on throughout the experiment. Injectors were removed at the end of each recording session, dummy injectors were reinserted and rats were returned to their home cages. On all other treatment days, rats were immediately transferred to their home cages after injection.

Only rats with electrochemical assembly localizations in NAc were included in the results reported here. Placement was verified at the end of the experiment by visual inspection when removing the assembly from the brain of euthanized rats. In a limited number of rats, the location of the assembly was further confirmed by microscopic examination of coronal sections stained with cresyl violet (Sabeti et al., 2002a).

Behavioral Data Acquisition.

Automated recordings of locomotor activity were obtained in the open field apparatus using a single photo beam frame (eight beams per dimension) near the base of the apparatus. Consecutive beam interruptions were converted to distance traveled (centimeters) per 5-min period. Head/limb stereotypy was defined as repetitive head movements, including head bobs and side-to-side head sways, or back and forth repetitive forelimb movements. The frequency of stereotypy was determined by observation and expressed as the fraction of time during each 15-min interval in which the behavior was exhibited, as previously described in detail (Sabeti et al., 2002b). Rearing was the cumulative number of times within each 15-min interval during which both forepaws were lifted and then at least one forepaw was placed back onto the floor.

High-Speed Chronoamperometry in Freely Moving Rats.

Upon transfer to the activity apparatus, the rat was connected to a miniature potentiostat headstage/tether (RAT HAT; Quanteon, L.L.C., Lexington, KY) via a four-pin telephone connector mounted on the rat's head. This allowed the rat free movement within the activity apparatus (Gerhardt et al., 1999; Sabeti et al., 2002a,b). The headstage/tether was linked to an IVEC-10/FAST-12 electrochemical recording system (Quanteon, L.L.C.). Continuous 100-ms square-wave potential pulses (0.0 to +0.55 V versus Ag/AgCl reference) were applied at 5 Hz to the recording microelectrode. A stable background oxidation signal was established in the absence of exogenous DA and set to zero. Subsequently, exogenous DA (40–300 pmol in saline containing 100 μM ascorbic acid, pH 7.4 adjusted with sodium hydroxide) was applied at 5-min intervals into NAc, using a microprocessor-controlled syringe-pump (1.01 μl/s; Stoelting Co., Wood Dale, IL; Gerhardt et al., 1999; Sabeti et al., 2002a,b). During each recording session, the DA ejection volume was initially adjusted for each rat to evoke baseline peak DA signal amplitude (Amax) responses within a range of 0.3 to 1.2 μM. Once three reproducible (i.e., within 20%)Amax responses were elicited by the same ejection volume, DA was applied once every 5 min at this constant amount throughout the remainder of the recording session for that day.

High-frequency spike artifacts in the DA signals were digitally filtered (cutoff frequency >0.028 Hz), as previously described in detail (Sabeti et al., 2002a). Amaxresponses were determined from the peak of the DA signal amplitudes using in vitro electrode calibration data to convert oxidation currents, averaged over 1-s epochs, to micromolar concentrations above the background. The efficiency of DA clearance was determined by fitting the decay segment of each DA signal to a single monoexponential decay function [A(t) =Amax ·e−k(t−t0); where A is the amplitude of the DA signal (micromolar) at any time t (seconds) afterAmax;t0 is the time at which Ahad decayed to approximately 80% ofAmax; and k is the first-order decay rate constant (per seconds); Sabeti et al., 2002a].R2 values for the exponential curve fits to the smoothed data ranged from 0.8999 to 0.9966. At the low picomolar amounts of DA applied here, k reflects theVmax/Kmratio, or efficiency of DA clearance, according to the Michaelis-Menten kinetic model of uptake (Sabeti et al., 2002a).

Statistical Analysis.

Data are expressed as mean values + S.E.M. Statistical analyses, including one- and two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Pearson correlation analysis, were performed using either SigmaStat (SPSS Science, Chicago, IL) or Prism (GraphPad Software, Inc., San Diego, CA) software. A level of p< 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Chemicals and Drugs.

Dopamine and other chemicals were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO). (−)-Cocaine HCl was obtained from the National Institute on Drug Abuse (Research Triangle Institute International, Research Triangle Park, NC).

Results

Individual Differences in Cocaine-Induced Behavioral Sensitization Are Associated with Initial Locomotor Responsiveness to Cocaine.

Previously we demonstrated that outbred male Sprague-Dawley rats can be effectively divided into two subgroups of cocaine responders, namely, low or high cocaine responders (LCRs or HCRs, respectively), using the median split of locomotor activity during the initial 30 min after an acute i.p. injection of 10 mg/kg cocaine (Sabeti et al., 2002b). In the follow-up longitudinal cocaine study reported here, a subset of rats from this previously characterized population, the group that had electrochemical microelectrode/microcannulae assemblies implanted chronically in NAc, continued to receive daily cocaine treatment. Thus, these rats received an injection of saline (1 ml/kg i.p.) on day 0 and daily injections of cocaine (10 mg/kg i.p.) on days 1 to 6 (experimental group; Table 1). Rats were subsequently challenged with an i.p. injection of the same dose of cocaine following a 24-h withdrawal (i.e., day 7) and a 7-day withdrawal (i.e., day 15) from the daily cocaine treatment.

We hypothesized that individual variability in initial responsiveness to cocaine might influence whether robust sensitized responses in behavioral activation and DA clearance inhibition were induced by the repeated cocaine treatment. To test this hypothesis, this subset of rats was reprofiled as either LCRs or HCRs. In this group, the median split of the distance traveled after the initial cocaine injection on day 1 was 7200 cm/30 min, resulting in 10 LCRs with a mean activity of 3800 ± 888 cm/30 min and 7 HCRs with a mean activity of 18100 ± 2910 (Fig. 1). As we previously observed in the larger population (Sabeti et al., 2002b), there was no correspondence between baseline activity in the 30 min preceding the cocaine injection and the cocaine-induced activity on day 1 (Fig. 1).

Figure 1
Figure 1

Baseline and cocaine-stimulated locomotor activity of individual rats in the experimental group (Table 1) on day 1 reveals differential initial responsiveness to cocaine. Horizontal lines in the scatter plots represent the median responses during the 30 min preceding (baseline) and the 30 min after injection of cocaine (10 mg/kg i.p.). Subsequently, individual rats were identified as either LCRs (open circles) or HCRs (filled circles) based on the median split of locomotor responsiveness to the acute cocaine injection. The bar graphs illustrate the mean values ± S.E.M. of the cocaine-stimulated activity in LCRs and HCRs and demonstrate the effectiveness of the median-split procedure for subdividing the rats into two groups of cocaine responders.

Before examining relationships between cocaine-induced alterations in behavior and DA clearance, first the time courses of the locomotor responses were compared within the two groups across all of the recording days (Fig. 2, A and B, left, LCRs and HCRs, respectively). All rats were fully acclimated to the activity apparatus before initiating the daily cocaine treatment. This was demonstrated on day 0 by the low levels of baseline activity in both LCRs and HCRs during the 30 min before and the 60 min after injection of saline. It should also be noted that these low levels of activity were observed in both groups despite the local applications of DA into NAc every 5 min. Furthermore, baseline locomotor activity did not change significantly over the 7 days of cocaine treatment or after the 7-day withdrawal in either LCRs or HCRs.

Figure 2
Figure 2

Differences in induction, expression, and persistence of cocaine-induced locomotor sensitization in LCRs (A) and HCRs (B). Baseline, saline- or cocaine-induced locomotor activity was recorded in the rats characterized as LCRs or HCRs in Fig. 1 (Table 1, experimental group). Saline-induced activity was recorded on day 0. Cocaine-induced activity was recorded on days 1, 3, 5, and 7 during the 7-day regimen of once-daily cocaine administration and after a 7-day withdrawal (day 15). Left, time courses of baseline and saline- or cocaine-induced locomotor activity during the 5-min recording intervals. Arrows indicate the time at which saline (1 ml/kg i.p.) or cocaine (10 mg/kg i.p.) was injected. Two-way ANOVAs, with both treatment day and time as the repeated measures, were used to analyze the activity during the 60 min after cocaine injection (see Results). Right, comparison of peak cocaine-stimulated locomotor responses. Activity was averaged during the first 30 min post-treatment. Because no significant differences existed in peak responses between days 1 and 3 or between days 5 and 7, these data sets were collapsed to represent the induction and expression phases of locomotor sensitization, respectively. Data are mean values ± S.E.M. (n = 10, LCRs;n = 7, HCRs). Significant differences reflect post hoc Bonferroni's multiple t test comparisons. ∗∗∗, p < 0.001 versus days 1 to 3 cocaine-induced response. #, p < 0.05; ##,p < 0.01; ###, p < 0.001 versus day 0 saline-induced response.

Cocaine-stimulated locomotor activity was analyzed over the 60 min after drug injection on days 1, 3, 5, 7, and 15 using a two-way ANOVA, with repeated measures on both factors (days1,3,5,7,15 × time0–60min). An overall significant effect of days was observed for cocaine-stimulated activity in LCRs (Fig. 2A, left; F4,402 = 7.102,p < 0.001), but not in HCRs (Fig. 2B, left). Further analysis showed that sensitized locomotor responses to cocaine (versus day 1) were expressed in LCRs only after day 3 of daily cocaine treatment and that they persisted in response to a cocaine challenge on day 15 after the 7-day withdrawal (Fig. 2A, left). The maximal effect of cocaine on locomotor activity was summarized for the two groups by averaging responses during the first 30 min after cocaine injection during the induction (i.e., days 1–3) and expression (i.e., days 5–7) of locomotor sensitization. These effects were compared with the saline-induced locomotor response over the same time interval on day 0 and to the cocaine-induced response on day 15 (Fig. 2, right). This analysis showed that during induction of sensitization in LCRs, cocaine-stimulated locomotor activity was not significantly different from saline-induced activity (Fig. 2A, right). However, by days 5 to 7 cocaine-stimulated activity was significantly potentiated by 400% above the cocaine-stimulated response during induction. After the 7-day withdrawal from the repeated treatment in LCRs, the cocaine-stimulated locomotor activity remained significantly augmented on day 15 versus days 1 to 3 and the saline-induced response. Interestingly, in HCRs cocaine-stimulated locomotor activity on days 1 to 3 and days 5 to 7 did not differ significantly (Fig. 2B, right) but was similar in magnitude to the sensitized responses in LCRs (Fig. 2A, right). The 7-day withdrawal from repeated cocaine produced no further augmentation in locomotor responses of HCRs to cocaine (Fig. 2B, right).

To determine whether cocaine-induced locomotor sensitization in individual rats was correlated with initial locomotor responsiveness to cocaine, the magnitudes of locomotor sensitization in LCRs on day 7 were plotted against their cocaine-induced locomotor activity on day 1 (Fig. 3). The magnitude of sensitization was defined as the ratio of each animal's day 7: day 1 cocaine-stimulated locomotor activity during the first 30 min after injection. Thus, a ratio in the range of 0 to 1 indicated a lack of cocaine-induced behavioral sensitization, whereas progressively higher values >1 were indicative of increasing levels of sensitization. In LCRs the magnitude of locomotor sensitization was robust, ranging from 2.1- to 21-fold increases over the initial cocaine-stimulated locomotor activity; and there was a significant inverse correlation between the magnitudes of initial locomotor responsiveness to cocaine and locomotor sensitization (Pearson r = −0.6832, p< 0.05; Fig. 3). Because locomotor sensitization was either absent or relatively modest in HCRs, with ratios varying from 0.3 to 1.7, only data from LCRs were included in the correlational analysis shown in Fig. 3. However, independent of the LCR/HCR classification, a significant inverse relationship was observed between the magnitudes of initial locomotor responsiveness to cocaine and locomotor sensitization in all of the rats studied (Pearson r = −0.5905, p < 0.05; n = 17).

Figure 3
Figure 3

Magnitude of cocaine-induced locomotor sensitization in individual LCR rats correlates inversely with their initial locomotor responsiveness to an acute cocaine injection. “Sensitization score” is the ratio of day7/day1 activity induced in the first 30 min after cocaine injection (Fig. 2A). The linear regression fit (—) and the 95% confidence interval (–) are shown. A sensitization score of 1 (horizontal dashed line) would indicate a lack of locomotor sensitization, whereas scores above 1 indicate increasing magnitudes of locomotor sensitization.

We also examined whether cocaine-induced sensitization was manifested in other behaviors, in particular those which may have competed for the expression of locomotor sensitization. Therefore, the effects of the repeated cocaine treatment were examined on cocaine-stimulated head/limb stereotypy and rearing behaviors (Fig.4). In LCRs, cocaine-induced head/limb stereotypy seemed to increase progressively with repeated treatment and this persisted after withdrawal; however, a statistically significant effect of days was not found (Fig. 4A, left). Cocaine-induced rearing responses in LCRs were increased on all days tested; therefore, there was not a significant effect of days (Fig. 4A, right). In contrast, although head/limb stereotypy was displayed in HCRs to the same extent across all cocaine treatment days, cocaine-induced rearing responses were progressively and significantly augmented by the repeated cocaine treatments (days1–3,5–7,15:F2,72 = 13.7, p < 0.0001; Fig. 4B). Thus, HCRs did exhibit behavioral sensitization of rearing, but not locomotor, responses.

Figure 4
Figure 4

Time course of cocaine-induced changes in stereotypic behaviors and rearing during repeated cocaine administration and after withdrawal in LCRs (A) and HCRs (B). The head/limb stereotypies and rearing were scored by observation (see Materials and Methods) in the same rats and during the same periods as the locomotor activity presented in Fig. 2. Behaviors were summed for 15-min intervals during the 30 min of baseline (B1 and B2) and 60 min of saline- or cocaine-induced responses (1–4). Data are mean values ± S.E.M. for LCR (n = 10) and HCR (n = 7) rats. For statistical analysis, cocaine-induced behaviors were averaged for days 1 and 3 and for days 5 and 7 and compared with day 15, after a 7-day withdrawal. A two-way ANOVA (treatment days1–3,5–7,15 × time1,2,3,4) revealed a significant effect of days on rearing in HCRs (F2,72 = 13.7,p < 0.0001).

Individual Differences in Cocaine-Induced Locomotor Sensitization Are Associated with Differential Cocaine-Induced Modulations in DA Clearance in NAc.

Simultaneous with the behavioral measurements, changes in DA clearance in NAc of all the rats were continuously monitored by high-speed chronoamperometry on days 0, 1, 3, 5, and 7 (Fig. 5). Additionally, the effects of the 7-day withdrawal and challenge by cocaine were evaluated on DA clearance in a subset of these rats whose microelectrode/microcannulae assemblies remained patent on day 15 (n = 7, LCRs;n = 4, HCRs). A constant amount of DA (40–300 pmol; subsaturating relative to the maximal clearance rates measured in vivo;Sabeti et al., 2002a) was applied at the recording site every 5 min. These DA applications evoked reproducible oxidation signals that were measured over a 30-min recording interval to obtain the predrug baseline value on each recording day (Fig. 5). Changes over baseline in the Amax and k parameters of the DA signal were used as indices of altered DAT function (Fig. 5). On each recording day amounts of DA locally applied were initially adjusted for each rat so that similar baselineAmax responses were achieved. Thus, mean baseline Amax values did not differ between LCRs and HCRs; these averaged 0.8 ± 0.4 and 0.7 ± 0.1 μM, respectively, over the 2-week period in which rats were treated repeatedly and then withdrawn from cocaine. The amounts of DA applied relative to Amaxvalues at baseline were averaged across days 1 and 3 and across days 5 and 7 to correspond to the induction and expression phases of locomotor sensitization, respectively, in the LCRs (see above). Initially (i.e., days 1–3) HCRs required 3-fold significantly greater amounts of DA than LCRs to elicit similar Amaxresponses (Fig. 6A). This finding is in agreement with our previous observations on day 1 in the same LCR and HCR rats (Sabeti et al., 2002b). Furthermore, although DA applications in LCRs did not differ significantly across the repeated treatment days or after withdrawal, in HCRs significantly lower amounts were necessary on days 5 to 7 than on days 1 to 3 to achieve comparableAmax responses (Fig. 6A). Despite the differences in the amounts of DA applied, predrug baseline kvalues (0.016–0.023 s−1) were not significantly different between LCRs and HCRs across the repeated cocaine treatment days and after withdrawal (Fig. 6B). This finding is in agreement with our observation that k is independent of applied DA within the relatively narrow range of DA applied here, whereas higher amounts of exogenous DA modulate the k for DA clearance as expected by active uptake kinetics (Sabeti et al., 2002a). Furthermore, predrug baseline k values were not significantly correlated with initial locomotor responsiveness to cocaine in individual rats (p = 0.673).

Figure 5
Figure 5

Representative time course of the effects of a challenge injection of cocaine (10 mg/kg i.p., arrow) on high-speed chronoamperometric recordings of exogenous DA signals in NAc of a rat that had been treated with cocaine (10 mg/kg/day i.p.) for 6 days before this cocaine challenge on day 7. Oxidation currents were evoked by local application of DA (80 pmol) at the recording site at 5-min intervals, averaged across 1-s bins and converted to concentrations based on in vitro electrode calibration. Note the reproducibility of the DA signals during the 30 min of predrug baseline recording and the transient increase after administration of cocaine. Inset, two representative signals evoked by local applications of DA (arrow) in this rat are shown on an expanded time scale to illustrate the increase above baseline in Amax, and the decrease ink, 10 min after the cocaine challenge. SeeMaterials and Methods for details. IncreasedAmax and decreased k values are indicative of reduced DAT function.

Figure 6
Figure 6

Baseline DA clearance parameters in NAc of LCRs and HCRs across repeated cocaine treatment days and after a 7-day withdrawal. Data are mean values ± S.E.M. of five to six reproducible predrug DA signals in LCRs (open columns;n = 10, days 1–3 and 5–7; n = 7, day 15) and HCRs (closed columns; n = 7, days 1–3 and 5–7; n = 4, day 15). Data were collapsed across days 1 and 3 and 5 and 7 to correspond to the induction and expression phases of locomotor sensitization, respectively. A, DA ejection volumes are indicated in arbitrary units relative to the baseline Amax responses evoked in each individual rat. B, baseline k reflects the efficiency of exogenous DA clearance in the absence of cocaine. MeanAmax responses were similar in all rats (0.6–0.8 μM). ∗, p < 0.05 versus the time-matched value in LCRs. #, p < 0.05 versus day 1 to 3 value.

In contrast to the modest changes in baseline DA clearance efficiency, robust alterations in cocaine-induced inhibition of DA clearance in NAc closely paralleled the time course of locomotor sensitization induced by the repeated cocaine administration. For example, in LCRs there was an overall significant effect of days on the cocaine-induced increases in Amax (Fig.7A, left;F4,314 = 4.101, p < 0.05), as revealed by a two-way ANOVA (days1,3,5,7,15 × time0–60min; time as the only repeated measure). This effect was not observed in HCRs (Fig. 7B, left), which also did not exhibit locomotor sensitization to cocaine (Fig. 2B). The effects of cocaine on Amax were summarized in LCRs and HCRs over the first 30 min after injection to correspond to the maximal effects of cocaine on locomotor activity (Fig. 2) and compared with the effect of saline on day 0 (Fig. 7, right). Specifically, on days 1 to 3 cocaine did not significantly alterAmax responses in LCRs, compared with saline (Fig. 7A, right). However, during the expression of locomotor sensitization on days 5 to 7 in LCRs, cocaine significantly potentiated the Amax response by 46 ± 12%, compared with both days 1 to 3 and saline.Amax responses were potentiated to 31 ± 11% by cocaine on day 15 after the 7-day withdrawal, although this effect was not significantly different compared with either days 1 to 3 or saline. As with locomotor activation, in HCRs there was no overall significant effect of days on cocaine-induced increases in Amax (Fig. 7B, right). In contrast to LCRs, cocaine administration on days 1 to 3 significantly potentiated Amax by 51 ± 18%, compared with saline. Although there was also a trend forAmax to be increased by cocaine on days 5 to 7 (33 ± 11%) and day 15 (23 ± 19%), these effects did not reach statistical significance versus the saline response.

Figure 7
Figure 7

Time course comparisons of baseline and cocaine-induced changes in DA signal Amaxduring repeated cocaine administration and after withdrawal in LCRs (A) and HCRs (B). Electrochemical data were recorded simultaneously with behavior in the same rats shown in Figs. 2 and 4 (n= 10, LCRs; n = 7, HCRs), with the exception of day 15 in which electrochemical data were obtained from a subset of these same animals (n = 7, LCRs; n = 4, HCRs). Data from days 1 and 3, and likewise from days 5 and 7, were collapsed to correspond to the induction and expression phases of locomotor sensitization, respectively (Fig. 2A). Arrows indicate time of the i.p. injections of saline (1 ml/kg) or cocaine (10 mg/kg). Left, time courses for repeated treatment effects on baseline and cocaine-induced changes in Amax are shown for the 5-min recording intervals. Two-way ANOVAs, with time as the only repeated measure, were performed on cocaine-induced changes inAmax across 0 to 60 min (seeResults). Right, graphs summarize the peak effects onAmax during the first 30 min post-treatment. Significant differences reflect post hoc Bonferroni's multiplet test comparisons. ∗∗, p < 0.01 versus the days 1 to 3 cocaine-induced response. #,p < 0.05; ##, p < 0.01 versus the day 0 saline-induced response.

Similar to cocaine-induced increases inAmax values in LCRs, an overall significant effect of days was observed on cocaine-induced reduction in the k for DA clearance in LCRs (Fig.8A, left;F4,304 = 3.396, p < 0.05). Specifically, on days 1 to 3 during the induction of locomotor sensitization, k was not significantly altered by cocaine, compared with saline on day 0 (Fig. 8A, right). However, during the expression of locomotor sensitization on days 5 to 7 in LCRs, cocaine significantly attenuated k by 24 ± 5%, versus days 1 to 3 and saline. This greater effect of cocaine on kpersisted on day 15 after the 7-day withdrawal from repeated cocaine treatment. Interestingly, in HCRs the cocaine-induced reductions ink on days 1 to 3 and days 5 to 7 did not differ significantly from each other but were of a similar magnitude as the sensitized responses in LCRs (Fig. 8B, right). The cocaine-induced reduction in k persisted, but did not change in magnitude, after the 7-day withdrawal from repeated cocaine (Fig. 8B, right). These results for cocaine-induced changes in the efficiency of DA clearance in LCRs versus HCRs are in agreement with both the cocaine-induced changes in locomotor activity and the DA clearance signal Amax responses.

Figure 8
Figure 8

Time course comparisons of baseline and cocaine-induced changes in DA signal k during repeated cocaine administration and after withdrawal in LCR (A) and HCR (B) rats. See Fig. 7 for experimental details and groups. Arrows indicate time of the i.p. injections of saline (1 ml/kg) or cocaine (10 mg/kg). Left, time courses for repeated treatment effects on baseline and cocaine-induced changes in k are shown for the 5-min recording intervals. Two-way ANOVAs, with time as the only repeated measures, were performed on cocaine-induced changes in kacross 0 to 60 min (see Results). Right, bar graphs summarize the peak effects on k during the first 30 min post-treatment. Significant differences reflect post hoc Bonferroni's multiple t test comparisons. ∗∗,p < 0.01 versus the averaged days 1 to 3 cocaine-induced effect. #, p < 0.05; ##,p < 0.01; ###, p < 0.001 versus the day 0 saline-induced effect.

Conditioning Does Not Contribute Significantly to Sensitized Behavioral and Electrochemical Responses to Cocaine Measured Here.

To control for the passage of time and any potential conditioned responses to the repeated injections of cocaine and/or local applications of DA, another group of rats with electrochemical assemblies chronically implanted in NAc received repeated saline injections for 7 days before an acute cocaine challenge injection (Table 1, control group). Furthermore, this same group subsequently received cocaine injections on five additional days, followed by a saline challenge injection on the 7th day (Table 1). Data collected in the experimental group on the day 7 cocaine challenge were averaged across the LCR and HCR responses and reanalyzed for significant differences from the control group. These comparisons are summarized in Fig. 9. Baseline locomotor activity during the 30 min immediately preceding either the cocaine or saline challenge injections did not differ significantly between the treatment groups, confirming that differences in locomotor responsiveness to the challenges were not due to differences in levels of baseline activity per se. The cocaine challenge on day 7 significantly increased locomotor activity above baseline in both the saline-pretreated control group and cocaine-pretreated experimental group. However, this increase was significantly greater (by 80%) in the cocaine-pretreated, compared with saline-pretreated, rats. This result confirmed that, independent of the LCR/HCR classification, the repeated cocaine regimen used here was effective in inducing locomotor sensitization. In contrast with the cocaine challenge after repeated saline treatment in the control group, the saline challenge after repeated cocaine treatment in these same rats did not increase locomotor activity above baseline. Thus, there was no apparent conditioned locomotor response to this particular repeated cocaine regimen.

Figure 9
Figure 9

Only male Sprague-Dawley rats treated repeatedly with cocaine exhibit locomotor sensitization to a subsequent cocaine challenge. The effects of repeated treatment with either saline (S) or cocaine (C) on baseline and saline or cocaine challenge-induced locomotor activity are shown. The first and third pairs of columns represent the control group and the second pair of columns represents the experimental group (Table 1). Locomotor activity is the cumulative distance traveled (centimeters) in the 30 min immediately preceding (baseline) and the 30 min after the cocaine or saline challenge injection. Data are mean values ± S.E.M. A two-way ANOVA revealed a significant effect of treatment (F2,68 = 18.16, p< 0.001) and time (baseline versus challenge;F1,68 = 21.03, p < 0.001). Significant effects indicated reflect post hoc Bonferroni's multiple t test comparisons. +, p < 0.05; +++, p < 0.001 versus the respective baseline. ∗∗, p < 0.01 versus the daily saline with a cocaine challenge. ###, p < 0.001 versus the daily cocaine with a saline challenge.

Electrochemical responses in the control and experimental groups were analyzed in a similar manner to the behavioral responses (Fig.10). On averageAmax responses were increased by 42 ± 6% above baseline after the cocaine challenge in the cocaine-pretreated experimental group (Fig. 10A). This effect was significantly greater, but only by 25%, compared with the effect of the cocaine challenge in the saline-pretreated control group (Fig.10A). Importantly, the potentiation of Amaxresponses in cocaine-pretreated rats was expressed only after a cocaine, but not a saline, challenge injection (Fig. 10A). Also consistent with DAT inhibition, k was decreased by 24 ± 3% below baseline after the cocaine challenge in the cocaine-pretreated experimental group (Fig. 10B). This was a significant reduction compared with the control group, with respect to the effect of both the cocaine challenge after repeated saline administration and the saline challenge after repeated cocaine administration (Fig. 10B). Overall, there was good concordance between the challenge-induced changes in locomotor activity and DA clearance parameters.

Figure 10
Figure 10

Only rats treated repeatedly with cocaine exhibit inhibition of DA clearance to a subsequent cocaine challenge. The effects of repeated treatment with either saline (S) or cocaine (C) on cocaine- or saline-induced changes in DA signalAmax (A) and k (B) parameters in NAc are shown. Data are mean values ± S.E.M. for the same rats in which locomotor responses were recorded simultaneously and reported in Fig. 9. For each rat, the DA clearance signal parameters were averaged across the first 30 min after the “challenge” injection of either cocaine (10 mg/kg) or saline (1 ml/kg) and expressed relative to its baseline value (average of five to six signal parameters immediately preceding the challenge injection). A one-way ANOVA revealed a significant effect of treatment onAmax (F2,36= 11.042, p < 0.001) and k(F2,36 = 27.941, p< 0.001). Significant differences indicated reflect posthoc Bonferroni's multiple t tests comparisons. ∗,p < 0.05; ∗∗, p < 0.01 versus the daily saline with a cocaine challenge. #,p < 0.05; ###, p < 0.001 versus the daily cocaine with a saline challenge.

Discussion

Whether DAT expression/activity is up- or down-regulated by repeated cocaine administration remains controversial (Zahniser et al., 1995; Kuhar and Pilotte, 1996; Zahniser and Doolen, 2001). Furthermore, the exact relationship between cocaine-induced adaptations in DAT function and changes in behavior has remained elusive. Previously, we found that DA clearance in NAc of anesthetized rats was more sensitive to cocaine inhibition after withdrawal from repeated cocaine administration (Cass et al., 1993a). Here, by monitoring the time course of cocaine-induced changes in behavior concomitantly with inhibition kinetics of DA clearance, we demonstrate the essential role of greater inhibition of DAT function to locomotor sensitization induced by repeated cocaine administration. Specifically, we found that the potential for expression of locomotor sensitization 1) can be predicted by the animal's initial locomotor responsiveness to an acute cocaine injection and 2) is confined to a subgroup of rats (LCRs) in which the efficiency to clear exogenous DA in NAc in the presence of cocaine diminishes with repeated administration.

Previously, we identified two distinct populations of cocaine responders using the median split of initial locomotor responses to acute low-dose cocaine in male Sprague-Dawley rats (Sabeti et al., 2002b). Subsequently, we have confirmed a trend for two components in this distribution (LCR component, mean 5,130 cm/30 min; S.D. = 2,140; proportion = 49%; HCR component, mean = 12,370; S.D. = 4,950; proportion = 51%; n = 32;p = 0.07; NOCOM program; Ott, 1979). Likewise, the distribution of Amax responses to acute cocaine in this larger population was bimodal (LCR component, mean 98% baseline; proportion = 58%; HCR component, mean 170% baseline; proportion = 42%; p < 0.01). Here, using a subset of these rats, we observed that differences in the initial locomotor responsiveness to cocaine accounted for nearly 47% of the variability in the magnitude of locomotor sensitization expressed by LCRs (Fig. 3). Furthermore, the LCR/HCR classification was predictive of the potential of individual rats to express cocaine-induced locomotor sensitization. LCRs exhibited minimal locomotor activation to the initial injection of cocaine but locomotor sensitization with repeated cocaine, whereas HCRs exhibited significant initial locomotor responsiveness to cocaine but failed to express locomotor sensitization with repeated administration. However, not all cocaine-induced behaviors were augmented in LCRs. Furthermore, HCRs exhibited sensitized cocaine-induced rearing responses. These observations, together with the finding that brain levels of cocaine are consistently increased in all male Sprague-Dawley rats receiving repeated i.p. injections of cocaine (Cass and Zahniser, 1993), suggest that pharmacokinetic differences can not satisfactorily explain the LCR versus HCR behavioral differences. It is also unlikely that increased rearing or head/limb stereotypy explained the lack of locomotor sensitization in HCRs because stereotypies were exhibited by LCRs to a similar extent on days 5 to 7 and did not preclude locomotor sensitization in these rats. However, we cannot rule out the possibility that a ceiling in locomotor activation precluded sensitization in HCRs because only the 10-mg/kg dose of cocaine was tested here. Dose-response studies would address whether HCRs are able to increase activity further and whether repeated cocaine administration shifts the dose-response relationship in LCRs, making cocaine a more potent or efficacious inhibitor of DAT. In any case, conditioned locomotor responses to the repeated injections were not apparent with our treatment paradigm, supporting earlier findings that the development of conditioned responses is not necessary for the expression of behavioral sensitization (Fraioli et al., 1999).

Greater activation in response to novelty, rather than to acute stimulant administration, has been used more often to predict enhanced vulnerability to psychostimulant-induced sensitization and self-administration (see Introduction). We observed the opposite relationship: HCRs exhibit higher spontaneous locomotor activity than LCRs during their initial exposure to the activity apparatus (i.e., day 0; Sabeti et al., 2002b) but did not express locomotor sensitization with repeated cocaine administration (this study). This lack of correspondence in expression of sensitization between our cocaine responders and the low- and high-novelty responders defined in the literature may reflect differences in experimental conditions. For instance, our rats underwent extensive handling and habituation to the testing environment before drug administration, factors previously documented to modulate drug responsiveness (Cools and Gingras, 1998;Fraioli et al., 1999; Tuinstra and Cools, 2000). Specifically, habituation can decrease the behavioral and NAc DA sensitivity to stimulants in high-novelty responders and increase sensitivity in low-novelty responders (Cools and Gingras, 1998; Tuinstra and Cools, 2000). These investigators have hypothesized that individual differences in the regulation of DA neurotransmission by neuroendocrine and/or noradrenergic systems underlie this reversal in sensitivity under various experimental conditions. On the other hand, the discrepancy may reflect differences underlying responsiveness to novelty and cocaine (Djano and Martin-Iverson, 2000; Sutton et al., 2000). The finding that unique provisional quantitative trait loci exist for novelty- versus cocaine-induced initial locomotor activity and sensitization (Phillips et al., 1998) further supports our hypothesis that HCRs may be phenotypically distinct from the high responders to novelty. Studies using self-administration and/or conditioned place preference paradigms are needed to define the relationship of the LCR/HCR phenotypes and cocaine reinforcement.

The temporal association between changes in behavior and DAT function in response to repeated cocaine (Figs. 2, 7, and 8) provides strong evidence that cocaine-induced regulation of DAT in NAc plays a critical role in the expression of locomotor sensitization to cocaine. This association reflected multiple recordings of exogenous DA clearance signals across the 7 days of repeated cocaine in the same individual rats. For example, initially on days 1 to 3, when locomotor sensitization was not yet expressed in LCRs,Amax and k parameters in NAc were not modulated by cocaine. The expression of cocaine-induced locomotor sensitization in LCRs on days 5 to 7 was, however, accompanied by potentiated Amax and reduced k, consistent with higher levels of extracellular DA and sensitized DA-related behaviors. Importantly, the sensitized effects of cocaine on behavior and DA clearance parameters in LCRs persisted after a 7-day withdrawal from repeated cocaine treatment, consistent with the long-lasting nature of sensitization. The absence of such regulation in HCRs and the control group ruled out a more general effect of the repeated DA applications on increased DAT sensitivity to cocaine. Overall, our findings are in agreement with reports of enhanced cocaine-induced inhibition of DA uptake after repeated cocaine administration (Izenwasser and Cox, 1990; Cass et al., 1993a; Lee et al., 1998; but see Ng et al., 1991; Masserano et al., 1994; Meiergerd et al., 1994; Chefer and Shippenberg, 2002).

The finding that cocaine-induced inhibition of DA clearance in LCRs was expressed only after 3 days of repeated cocaine administration strongly suggests that protein synthesis and/or recruitment of other systems was/were required for the long-term alterations in DAT sensitivity to cocaine in LCRs. On the other hand, LCR/HCR differences in the acute cocaine response may reflect intrinsic variations in more rapid, nongenomic mechanisms of DAT regulation in response to acute inhibition (i.e., cell surface trafficking; Daws et al., 2002; Little et al., 2002). Also, although the NAc is sufficient for mediating the initial locomotor response to acute cocaine (Delfs et al., 1990), a number of long-lasting neuroadaptations in NAc, as well as other DA projection sites, are necessary for the expression of stimulant-induced locomotor sensitization (Vanderschuren and Kalivas, 2000; Nestler, 2001; Everitt and Wolf, 2002). Whether and how glutamatergic and/or GABAergic systems are involved in the LCR/HCR differences in sensitization remains to be investigated. Furthermore, future studies will address whether sensitization in cocaine-induced rearing, as opposed to locomotor activity, in HCRs reflects alterations in DAT sensitivity to cocaine inhibition in the dorsal striatum, which plays an important role in stereotypic behaviors.

On day 1 greater amounts of exogenous DA were applied in NAc of HCRs than LCRs to achieve similar Amaxresponses (Sabeti et al., 2002b; present study). Here, we demonstrated that this group difference was surmounted after day 3, suggesting that the initial difference likely reflected higher baseline DA clearance capacity in NAc of HCRs than LCRs, rather than variability in injector locations. Although this is discordant with the observed higher initial sensitivity to cocaine inhibition, future kinetic experiments will address whether lower DAT affinity for DA might explain this apparent discrepancy. In contrast, in dorsal striatum equivalent amounts of DA were required on day 1 to achieve similarAmax responses in LCRs and HCRs (Sabeti et al., 2002b). This suggests that, by itself, differences in amounts of DA applied are unlikely to explain the absence of altered DAT sensitivity to cocaine inhibition over time, as observed here in HCRs. Two possible explanations for the decreased amounts of DA needed in NAc of HCRs over time are fewer functional uptake sites secondary to tissue damage and/or regulation resulting in reduced basal DAT function. Because the amount of DA needed in LCRs remained constant across time, the latter is the more likely explanation. Chefer and Shippenberg (2002) have reported such changes in behaviorally sensitized rats, namely a reduction in basal DAT function with no changes in cocaine-induced DAT inhibition. Interestingly, behavioral sensitization in this study was assessed by rating repetitive/stereotypic behaviors. Together, these findings underscore the importance of assessing sensitization by both locomotor activity and stereotypy to understand the relevance of DAT regulation to changes in behavioral responsiveness. Furthermore, our results, along with previous reports, support the hypothesis that cocaine-induced adaptations in DAT in the NAc are necessary for the expression of locomotor sensitization. Therefore, LCR/HCR rats may be useful models for further study of differential phenotypes for initial sensitivity and sensitization to cocaine.

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge Gaynor Larson for expert technical assistance in setting up the electrochemical recordings.

Footnotes

  • This work was supported by National Institutes of Health Grants DA04216 (to N.R.Z.), AG06434 and NS39787 (to G.A.G.), Training Grant GM07635 (to J.S.), and Research Scientist Awards DA15050 (to N.R.Z.) and MH01245 (to G.A.G.).

  • DOI: 10.1124/jpet.102.047258

  • Abbreviations:
    DA
    dopamine
    DAT
    dopamine transporter
    NAc
    nucleus accumbens
    Amax
    peak signal amplitude
    ANOVA
    analysis of variance
    LCR
    low cocaine responder
    HCR
    high cocaine responder
    • Received November 22, 2002.
    • Accepted December 30, 2002.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Bardo MT,
    2. Donohew RL,
    3. Harrington NG
    (1996) Psychobiology of novelty seeking and drug seeking behavior. Behav Brain Res 77:23–43.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Boulay D,
    2. Duterte-Boucher D,
    3. Leroux-Nicollet I,
    4. Naudon L,
    5. Costentin J
    (1996) Locomotor sensitization and decrease in [3H]mazindol binding to the dopamine transporter in the nucleus accumbens are delayed after chronic treatments by GBR12783 or cocaine. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 278:330–337.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    1. Cass WA,
    2. Gerhardt GA,
    3. Gillespie K,
    4. Curella P,
    5. Mayfield RD,
    6. Zahniser NR
    (1993a) Reduced clearance of exogenous dopamine in rat nucleus accumbens, but not in dorsal striatum, following cocaine challenge in rats withdrawn from repeated cocaine administration. J Neurochem 61:273–283.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Cass WA,
    2. Zahniser NR
    (1993) Cocaine levels in striatum and nucleus accumbens: augmentation following challenge injection in rats withdrawn from repeated cocaine administration. Neurosci Lett 152:177–180.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Cass WA,
    2. Zahniser NR,
    3. Flach KA,
    4. Gerhardt GA
    (1993b) Clearance of exogenous dopamine in rat dorsal striatum and nucleus accumbens: role of metabolism and effects of locally applied uptake inhibitors. J Neurochem 61:2269–2278.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Chefer VI,
    2. Shippenberg TS
    (2002) Changes in basal and cocaine-evoked extracellular dopamine uptake and release in the rat nucleus accumbens during early abstinence from cocaine: quantitative determination under transient conditions. Neuroscience 112:907–919.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Cools AR,
    2. Gingras MA
    (1998) Nijmegen high and low responders to novelty: a new tool in the search after the neurobiology of drug abuse liability. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 60:151–159.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Covington HE,
    2. Miczek KA
    (2001) Repeated social-defeat stress, cocaine or morphine. Effects on behavioral sensitization and intravenous cocaine self-administration “binges”. Psychopharmacology 158:388–398.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Daws LC,
    2. Callaghan PD,
    3. Moron JA,
    4. Kahlig KM,
    5. Shippenberg TS,
    6. Javitch JA,
    7. Galli A
    (2002) Cocaine increases dopamine uptake and cell surface expression of dopamine transporters. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 290:1545–1550.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. Delfs JM,
    2. Schreiber L,
    3. Kelley AE
    (1990) Microinjection of cocaine into the nucleus accumbens elicits locomotor activation in the rat. J Neurosci 10:303–310.
    OpenUrlAbstract
  11. ↵
    1. De Vries TJ,
    2. Schoffelmeer ANM,
    3. Binnekade R,
    4. Raaso H,
    5. Vanderschuren LJMJ
    (2001) Relapse to cocaine- and heroin-seeking behavior mediated by dopamine D2 receptors is time-dependent and associated with behavioral sensitization. Neuropsychopharmacology 26:18–26.
  12. ↵
    1. Djano S,
    2. Martin-Iverson MT
    (2000) Does locomotor response to novelty in rats predict susceptibility to develop sensitization to cocaine and PHNO? Behav Pharmacol 11:455–470.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Everitt BJ,
    2. Wolf ME
    (2002) Psychomotor stimulant addiction: a neuronal systems perspective. J Neurosci 22:3312–3320.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  14. ↵
    1. Fraioli S,
    2. Crombag HS,
    3. Badiani A,
    4. Robinson TE
    (1999) Susceptibility to amphetamine-induced locomotor sensitization is modulated by environmental stimuli. Neuropsychopharmacology 20:533–541.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Gerhardt GA,
    2. Ksir C,
    3. Pivik C,
    4. Dickinson SD,
    5. Sabeti J,
    6. Zahniser NR
    (1999) Methodology for coupling local application of dopamine and other chemicals with rapid in vivo electrochemical recordings in freely-moving rats. J Neurosci Methods 87:67–76.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    1. Hebert MA,
    2. Gerhardt GA
    (1998) Normal and drug-induced locomotor behavior in aging: comparison to evoked DA release and tissue content in Fischer 344 rats. Brain Res 797:42–54.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Izenwasser S,
    2. Cox BM
    (1990) Daily cocaine treatment produces a persistent reduction of [3H]dopamine uptake in vitro in rat nucleus accumbens but not in striatum. Brain Res 531:338–341.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. ↵
    1. Kuhar MJ,
    2. Pilotte NS
    (1996) Neurochemical changes in cocaine withdrawal. Trends Pharmacol Sci 17:260–264.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Lee TH,
    2. Gee KR,
    3. Ellinwood EH,
    4. Seidler FJ
    (1998) Altered cocaine potency in the nucleus accumbens following 7-day withdrawal from intermittent but not continuous treatment: voltametric assessment of dopamine uptake in the rat. Psychopharmacology 137:303–310.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. Letchworth SR,
    2. Sexton T,
    3. Childers SR,
    4. Vrana KE,
    5. Vaughan RA,
    6. Davies HML,
    7. Porrino LJ
    (1999) Regulation of rat dopamine transporter mRNA and protein by chronic cocaine administration. J Neurochem 73:1982–1989.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. Little KY,
    2. Elmer LW,
    3. Zhong H,
    4. Scheys JO,
    5. Zhang L
    (2002) Cocaine induction of dopamine transporter trafficking to the plasma membrane. Mol Pharmacol 61:436–445.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. ↵
    1. Marinelli M,
    2. White FJ
    (2000) Enhanced vulnerability to cocaine self-administration is associated with elevated impulse activity of midbrain dopamine neurons. J Neurosci 20:8876–8885.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  23. ↵
    1. Masserano JM,
    2. Venable D,
    3. Wyatt RJ
    (1994) Effects of chronic cocaine administration on [3H]dopamine uptake in nucleus accumbens, striatum and frontal cortex of rats. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 270:133–141.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  24. ↵
    1. Meiergerd SM,
    2. Hooks SM,
    3. Schenk JO
    (1994) The striatal transporter for dopamine in the rat may be kinetically up-regulated following 3 weeks of withdrawal from cocaine self-administration. J Neurochem 63:1277–1281.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  25. ↵
    1. Nestler EJ
    (2001) Molecular neurobiology of addiction. Am J Addict 10:201–217.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    1. Ng JP,
    2. Hubert GW,
    3. Justice JB
    (1991) Increased stimulated release and uptake of dopamine in nucleus accumbens after repeated cocaine administration as measured by in vivo voltametry. J Neurochem 56:1485–1492.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. ↵
    1. Ott J
    (1979) Detection of rare major genes in lipid levels. Hum Genet 51:79–91.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. ↵
    1. Phillips TJ,
    2. Huson MG,
    3. McKinnon CS
    (1998) Localization of genes mediating acute and sensitized locomotor responses to cocaine in BXD/Ty recombinant inbred mice. J Neurosci 18:3023–3034.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  29. ↵
    1. Piazza PV,
    2. Le Moal ML
    (1996) Pathophysiological basis of vulnerability to drug abuse: role of an interaction between stress, glucocorticoids and dopaminergic neurons. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 36:359–378.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. ↵
    1. Pilotte NS,
    2. Sharpe LG,
    3. Kuhar MJ
    (1994) Withdrawal of repeated intravenous infusions of cocaine persistently reduces binding to dopamine transporters in the nucleus accumbens of Lewis rats. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 269:963–969.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  31. ↵
    1. Robinson TE,
    2. Berridge KC
    (1993) The neural basis of drug craving: an incentive-sensitization theory of addiction. Brain Res Brain Res Rev 18:247–291.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. ↵
    1. Sabeti J,
    2. Adams CE,
    3. Burmeister J,
    4. Gerhardt GA,
    5. Zahniser NR
    (2002a) Kinetic analysis of striatal clearance of exogenous dopamine recorded by chronoamperometry in freely-moving rats. J Neurosci Methods 121:41–52.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. ↵
    1. Sabeti J,
    2. Gerhardt GA,
    3. Zahniser NR
    (2002b) Acute cocaine differentially alters accumbens and striatal dopamine clearance in low and high cocaine locomotor responders: behavioral and electrochemical recordings in freely-moving rats. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 302:1201–1211.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  34. ↵
    1. Sutton MA,
    2. Karanian DA,
    3. Self DW
    (2000) Factors that determine a propensity for cocaine-seeking behavior during abstinence in rats. Neuropsychopharmacology 22:626–641.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. ↵
    1. Tuinstra T,
    2. Cools AR
    (2000) High and low responders to novelty: effects of adrenergic agents on the regulation of accumbal dopamine under challenged and non-challenged conditions. Neuroscience 99:55–64.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. ↵
    1. Vanderschuren LJMJ,
    2. Kalivas PW
    (2000) Alterations in dopaminergic and glutamatergic transmission in the induction and expression of behavioral sensitization: a critical review of preclinical studies. Psychopharmacology 151:99–120.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. ↵
    1. Vezina P,
    2. Lorrain DS,
    3. Arnold GM,
    4. Austin JD,
    5. Suto N
    (2002) Sensitization of midbrain dopamine neuron reactivity promotes the pursuit of amphetamine. J Neurosci 22:4654–4662.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  38. ↵
    1. Wilson JM,
    2. Nobrega JN,
    3. Carroll ME,
    4. Niznik HB,
    5. Shannak K,
    6. Lac ST,
    7. Pristupa ZB,
    8. Dixon LM,
    9. Kish SJ
    (1994) Heterogenous subregional binding patterns of 3H-WIN 35, 428 and 3H-GBR 12, 935 are differentially regulated by chronic cocaine self-administration. J Neurosci 14:2966–2979.
    OpenUrlAbstract
  39. ↵
    1. Zahniser NR,
    2. Doolen S
    (2001) Chronic and acute regulation of Na+/Cl−-dependent neuro-transmitter transporters: drugs, substrates, presynaptic receptors and signaling systems. Pharmacol Ther 92:21–55.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. ↵
    1. Hammer Jr RP
    1. Zahniser NR,
    2. Gerhardt GA,
    3. Cass WA
    (1995) Chronic cocaine action on the dopamine transporter. in The Neurobiology of Cocaine: Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms, ed Hammer Jr RP (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL), pp 181–197.
  41. ↵
    1. Zahniser NR,
    2. Larson GA,
    3. Gerhardt GA
    (1999) In vivo dopamine clearance rate in rat striatum: regulation by extracellular dopamine concentration and dopamine transporter inhibitors. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 289:266–277.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
View Abstract
Back to top

In this issue

Download PDF
Article Alerts
Email Article
Citation Tools

Research ArticleNEUROPHARMACOLOGY

Individual Differences in Cocaine-Induced Locomotor Sensitization in Low and High Cocaine Locomotor-Responding Rats Are Associated with Differential Inhibition of Dopamine Clearance in Nucleus Accumbens

Jilla Sabeti, Greg A. Gerhardt and Nancy R. Zahniser
Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics April 1, 2003, 305 (1) 180-190; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1124/jpet.102.047258
Permalink:
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo

Jump to section