Amphetamine or cocaine limits the ability of later experience to promote structural plasticity in the neocortex and nucleus accumbens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drugs of abuse and many other kinds of experiences share the ability to alter the morphology of neuronal dendrites and spines, the primary site of excitatory synapses in the brain. We hypothesized, therefore, that exposure to psychostimulant drugs might influence later experience-dependent structural plasticity. We tested this hypothesis by treating rats repeatedly with amphetamine or cocaine and then housing them in either a complex environment or standard laboratory cages for 3-3.5 mo. The brains were processed for Golgi-Cox staining, and the number of dendritic branches and the density of dendritic spines on medium spiny neurons in the nucleus accumbens and pyramidal cells in the parietal cortex were quantified. On most measures, prior treatment with amphetamine or cocaine interfered with the ability of experience in a complex environment to increase dendritic arborization and spine density. We conclude that in some brain regions, repeated exposure to psychomotor-stimulant drugs limits the ability of later experience to produce this form of synaptic plasticity, which may contribute to the persistent behavioral and cognitive deficits associated with drug abuse.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".