Interference with AMPA receptor endocytosis: effects on behavioural and neurochemical correlates of amphetamine sensitization in male rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Behavioural sensitization has been linked to drug craving in both clinical and preclinical studies of addiction. Increased motor activity is accompanied by enhanced dopamine (DA) release, particularly in the nucleus accumbens (NAcc). The neural bases of sensitization are linked to alterations in synaptic connections that also underlie learning and memory. The present study uses an "interference" peptide, Tat-GluA2(3Y), that blocks long-term depression (LTD) at glutamatergic synapses by disrupting the endocytosis of α- amino-3-hydroxy-5-methylisoxazole-4-propionic acid receptors (AMPARs), to explore the role of this form of synaptic plasticity in the induction and maintenance of sensitization. METHODS: Rats were given 5 injections of d-amphetamine (d-AMPH, 1.0 mg/kg, intraperitoneal) every second day. Tat-GluA2(3Y), was administered by 2 different routes (intravenously and intracerebrally to the ventral tegmental area [VTA] or to the NAcc) before each injection of d-AMPH. After a 14-day drug-free period, expression of behavioural sensitization was evoked by a challenge injection of d-AMPH (0.5 mg/kg, intraperitoneal). Dopamine efflux in the NAcc was measured by high-pressure liquid chromatography with electrochemical detection analyses of brain dialysates on days 1, 9 and 24 of the intravenous peptide experiment. RESULTS: Systemic administration of Tat-GluA2(3Y) during the induction phase blocked maintenance of behavioural sensitization and attenuated the maintenance of neurochemical sensitization. Intra-VTA infusion of Tat-GluA2(3Y) before each administration of d-AMPH did not affect induction, but inhibited maintenance and subsequent expression of sensitization, whereas intra-NAcc infusion of the peptide did not affect induction or maintenance of sensitization. LIMITATIONS: The relevance of behavioural sensitization in rodents is related to the development of craving and does not provide direct measures of drug reinforcement. CONCLUSION: These findings confirm that drug-induced neuroplasticity is labile and may be subject to disruption at a time when long-lasting associations between drug reward and contextual stimuli are formed. Furthermore, the unique ability of Tat-GluA2(3Y) to block maintenance of behavioural sensitization implicates LTD in the consolidation of essential associative memories. Tat-GluA2(3Y) has the unique ability to disrupt functional neuroadaptations triggered by repeated psychostimulant exposure and therefore may protect against the development of craving and drug seeking behaviours.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".