Chronic treatment with Δ‐9‐tetrahydrocannabinol alters the structure of neurons in the nucleus accumbens shell and medial prefrontal cortex of rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The potential of repeated exposure to Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (Delta(9)-THC) to produce long-lasting changes in synaptic connections in a manner similar to other drugs of abuse was evaluated in Sprague-Dawley rats. For 12 days, rats received two i.p. injections per day (8 h apart) of vehicle, a low dose of Delta(9)-THC (0.5 mg/kg), or escalating doses of Delta(9)-THC (0.5-4.0 mg/kg). Thirty days later, they were evaluated for sensitized locomotor activity (during the night cycle) for 60 min on each of three trials. Using a within-groups design, rats were tested following an injection of vehicle, 0.5 mg/kg Delta(9)-THC or 2.0 mg/kg Delta(9)-THC. The rats showed no evidence of sensitized locomotor activity in any group. Twenty-four hours after the final sensitization test, their brains were removed and then processed for Golgi-Cox staining. Prior exposure to Delta(9)-THC (both the low dose and the escalating doses) increased the length of the dendrites as well as the number of dendritic branches in the shell of the nucleus accumbens and in the medial prefrontal cortex, but not in the hippocampus, striatum, orbital frontal cortex, parietal cortex, or occipital cortex. These results are similar to those evident in brains of rats sensitized to amphetamine, and support previous findings that cannabinoids promote DA activity in the mesolimbic DA system.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".