Dopamine and Glutamate Interaction Mediates Reinstatement of Drug-Seeking Behavior by Stimulation of the Ventral Subiculum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Drug addiction is a chronic brain disease characterized by recurrent episodes of relapse to drug-seeking/-taking behaviors. The ventral subiculum, the primary output of the hippocampus, plays a critical role in mediating drug-seeking behavior. METHODS: A d-amphetamine intravenous self-administration rat model was employed along with focal electrical stimulation of the ventral subiculum (20 Hz/200 pulses) to examine its role in reinstatement of drug-seeking behavior. Dopamine efflux in the nucleus accumbens was measured by in vivo microdialysis and subsequent HPLC-ED analyses. Pharmacological antagonism of dopamine and ionotropic glutamate receptors locally within the nucleus accumbens was employed to assess the role of glutamate and dopamine in reinstatement of drug-seeking behavior induced by stimulation of the ventral subiculum. RESULTS: Here, we demonstrate that reinstatement of drug-seeking behavior following extinction of d-amphetamine self-administration by rats was induced by electrical stimulation in the ventral subiculum but not the cortex. This reinstatement was accompanied by a significant increase in dopamine efflux in the nucleus accumbens and was disrupted by microinfusion of a dopamine D1 or D2 antagonist into the nucleus accumbens. Inhibition of N-methyl-D-aspartate or non- N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors had no effect on the reinstatement induced by ventral subiculum stimulation, whereas co-infusion of D1 and N-methyl-D-aspartate antagonists at formerly ineffective doses prevented drug-seeking behavior. CONCLUSIONS: These data support the hypothesis that dopamine/glutamate interactions within the ventral striatum related to memory processes are involved in relapse to addictive behavior.
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".