The dopamine D3 receptor-preferring partial agonist BP 897 dose-dependently attenuates the expression of amphetamine-conditioned place preference in rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previously we reported that systemic administration of the dopamine D3 receptor-preferring partial agonist BP 897 blocked the expression, but not the acquisition, of amphetamine-conditioned activity. This suggested the hypothesis that BP 897 would block the expression, but not the acquisition, of amphetamine-conditioned place preference (CPP). Thus, during preconditioning rats had access to two chambers connected by a tunnel for three 15-min sessions. During eight conditioning days with the tunnel blocked, one chamber was paired with drug administration for four 30-min sessions, alternating with pairing of the other chamber with saline administration. In a drug-free test session, time on the drug-paired side was compared to time spent there in preconditioning; a significant increase was defined as a place preference. Systemic amphetamine (2.0 mg/kg) or amphetamine+BP 897 (1.0, 2.0 mg/kg) during conditioning produced a significant place preference, while administration of BP 897 (1.0 or 2.0 but not 0.5 mg/kg) during the test blocked the amphetamine-CPP. There was no evidence that BP 897 produced a conditioned aversion. Results supported the hypothesis that BP 897 would block expression, but not acquisition, of amphetamine-CPP.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".