Deletion of α5 nicotine receptor subunits abolishes nicotinic aversive motivational effects in a manner that phenocopies dopamine receptor antagonism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nicotine addiction is a worldwide epidemic that claims millions of lives each year. Genetic deletion of α5 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) subunits has been associated with increased nicotine intake, however, it remains unclear whether acute nicotine is less aversive or more rewarding, and whether mice lacking the α5 nAChR subunit can experience withdrawal from chronic nicotine. We used place conditioning and conditioned taste avoidance paradigms to examine the effect of α5 subunit-containing nAChR deletion (α5 -/-) on conditioned approach and avoidance behaviour in nondependent and nicotine-dependent and -withdrawn mice, and compared these motivational effects with those elicited after dopamine receptor antagonism. We show that nondependent α5 -/- mice find low, non-motivational doses of nicotine rewarding, and do not show an aversive conditioned response or taste avoidance to higher aversive doses of nicotine. Furthermore, nicotine-dependent α5 -/- mice do not show a conditioned aversive motivational response to withdrawal from chronic nicotine, although they continue to exhibit a somatic withdrawal syndrome. These effects phenocopy those observed after dopamine receptor antagonism, but are not additive, suggesting that α5 nAChR subunits act in the same pathway as dopamine and are critical for the experience of nicotine's aversive, but not rewarding motivational effects in both a nondependent and nicotine-dependent and -withdrawn motivational state. Genetic deletion of α5 nAChR subunits leads to a behavioural phenotype that exactly matches that observed after antagonizing dopamine receptors, thus we suggest that modulation of nicotinic receptors containing α5 subunits may modify dopaminergic signalling, suggesting novel therapeutic treatments for smoking cessation.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".