Differential effects of D1 and D2 dopamine agonists on memory, motivation, learning and response time in non‐human primates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dopamine (DA) plays a critical role in cognition, motivation and information processing. DA action has been shown to both improve and/or impair cognition across different receptor types, species, subjects and tasks. This complex relationship has been described as an inverted U-shaped function and may be due to the differential effects of DA receptor activation in the striatum and prefrontal cortex. We have investigated the effects of selective DA agonists on cognitive performance in healthy monkeys using a touch screen running tasks from the CAmbridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB). One of two DA agonist drugs or placebo was administered prior to each daily CANTAB session: Dihydrexidine hydrochloride (selective D1 agonist, 0.4-0.9 mg/kg), or sumanirole maleate (selective D2 agonist 0.05-0.3 mg/kg). Three CANTAB tasks were tested: (a) "self-ordered sequential search task" which tested spatial working memory, (b) "reversal learning task," which tested association learning, cognitive flexibility and attention and (c) "visually guided reaching task," which tested reaction time and accuracy. At high dosages, the D2 agonist improved spatial working memory performance, while impairing reversal learning and slowing reach response latency. No consistent cognitive effects were observed with the D1 agonist across the dosages tested. A significant decrease in trial completion rate was observed at the higher dosages of both the D1 and D2 agonists which were consistent with decreased motivation. These results are consistent with task-specific effects of a D2 agonist as well as dose specific insensitivities of a D1 agonist on cognitive and motor behaviors in a healthy monkey.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".