Female and male rats in late adolescence differ from adults in amphetamine-induced locomotor activity, but not in conditioned place preference for amphetamine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rodent models display differences in drug-induced behaviour between prepubertal/young adolescents and adults that parallel developmental differences in people; however, little is known as to when the transition to 'adultlike' behaviour occurs. We investigated the differences in locomotor and reward responses to amphetamines in male and female rats in late adolescence and compared them with corresponding adult responses. Long-Evans rats were tested for locomotor activity and conditioned place preference (CPP) for amphetamine (0.25, 0.5 or 1.0 mg/kg), beginning at 45 or 69 days of age. Adolescent female rats moved less to the first injection of amphetamine compared with adult female rats irrespective of dose, whereas adolescent male rats did not differ from adults. Adolescent female rats significantly increased locomotor activity in response to subsequent injections of amphetamine at all three doses, whereas such sensitization was only found at the highest dose for adult female and male rats. No effect of repeated injections at any dose was observed in adolescent male rats. No age differences were observed in CPP, but female rats showed greater CPP during the dioestrous than during the oestrous phase of the cycle. These data suggest that differences in neural systems underlying some behavioural responses to amphetamine continue to mature postpubertally into late adolescence in a sex-specific manner.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.004 | 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".