Daily Monitoring of Dopamine Efflux Reveals a Short-Lasting Occlusion of the Dopamine Agonist Properties of<i>d-</i>Amphetamine by Dopamine Transporter Blockers GBR 12909 and Methylphenidate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In vivo brain microdialysis was used in conjunction with "reverse-dialysis" of the dopamine-transporter (DAT) blockers GBR 12909 and methylphenidate (MPH) to observe the temporal course of their effects on d-amphetamine (d-AMPH)-induced increases in dopamine (DA) efflux in the rat nucleus accumbens (NAc). Reverse-dialysis of d-AMPH (10 μM) for 30 min resulted in a 2000-2500% increase in DA efflux. Pretreatment with GBR 12909 or MPH (20, 100 μM) for 90 min, which on their own elevated DA levels ∼2000-3000% above baseline values, dose-dependently occluded d-AMPH-evoked DA efflux. In GBR 12909-treated rats, basal levels of DA remained dramatically elevated at 24, 48, and 72 h following treatment, while levels in the MPH group returned back toward pretreatment values. Despite this contrast in basal DA efflux, the magnitudes of DA efflux evoked by a second exposure to d-AMPH were comparable in the two treatment groups. Together, these data support the development of DAT blockers as potential pharmacological interventions for the control of psychostimulant abuse. Furthermore, our data implicate DAT as a common site of action for both GBR 12909 and MPH, as well as d-AMPH.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".