MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161491285 · doi:10.1073/pnas.1106277108

Protein kinase C epsilon modulates nicotine consumption and dopamine reward signals in the nucleus accumbens

2011· article· en· W2161491285 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Anna Lee, Robert O. Messing

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicReceptor Mechanisms and Signaling
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on Alcohol Abuse and AlcoholismCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsNucleus accumbensNicotineDopamineAddictionNicotinic agonistConditioned place preferenceStriatumMedium spiny neuronPharmacologyProtein kinase CNeuroscienceCholinergicChemistryEndocrinologyInternal medicineBiologyReceptorMedicineKinaseBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nicotine addiction and alcohol use disorders are very widespread and often occur together. Currently, there is no single drug approved for the simultaneous treatment of both conditions. Although these conditions share common genetic factors, the molecular mechanisms underlying their comorbidity are unknown. We have previously shown that mice lacking protein kinase C epsilon (PKCε) show decreased ethanol self-administration and reward as well as increased aversion to ethanol. Here we find that Prkce(-/-) mice self-administer less nicotine and show decreased conditioned place preference for nicotine compared with wild-type mice. In Prkce(-/-) mice, these behaviors are associated with reduced levels of α(6) and β(3) nicotinic receptor subunit mRNA in the ventral midbrain and striatum as well as a functional deficit in cholinergic modulation of dopamine release in nucleus accumbens. Our results indicate that PKCε regulates reward signaling through α(6)-containing nicotinic receptors and suggest that PKCε could be a target for the treatment of comorbid nicotine and alcohol addictions.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.163

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicReceptor Mechanisms and SignalingFrench-language works237,207