Pharmacological investigations of a yohimbine–impulsivity interaction in rats
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Both impulsivity and stress are risk factors for substance abuse, but it is not clear how these two processes interact to alter susceptibility for the disorder. The aim of this project was to examine the pharmacology of a stress-impulsivity interaction in rats. To do so, we tested the effects of yohimbine on impulsive action and then assessed whether behavioural changes could be reduced by antagonists at different receptor subtypes. Male Long-Evans rats were injected with various doses of yohimbine (0-5.0 mg/kg) before testing in the response-inhibition task. In subsequent experiments, yohimbine (2.5 mg/kg) was injected following pretreatment with the following receptor antagonists: corticotropin-releasing factor receptor 1, antalarmin (0-20 mg/kg); glucocorticoid, mifepristone (0-30 mg/kg); noradrenergic (NA) α1, prazosin (0-2 mg/kg); NA α2, guanfacine (0-0.5 mg/kg); NA β2, propranolol (0.5-2.0 mg/kg); dopamine D1/5, SCH 39166 (0-0.0625 mg/kg); μ opioid, naloxone (0-2 mg/kg); or 5-HT2A, M100907 (0.005-0.05 mg/kg). In all experiments, impulsive action was measured as increased premature responding. Yohimbine dose dependently increased impulsive action, but the effect was not reversed by antagonist pretreatment. None of the drugs altered any other behavioural measure. We conclude that stress-impulsivity interactions are likely mediated by a synergy of multiple neurotransmitter systems.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it