Male HIV‐1 transgenic rats show reduced cocaine‐maintained lever‐pressing compared to F344 wildtype rats despite similar baseline locomotion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The HIV-1 transgenic (Tg) rat model is valuable for understanding HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND) and accompanying substance use and misuse. Tg and F344/NHsd wildtype (WT) rats were allowed to self-administer intrajugular cocaine. For the first 7 sessions, neither genotype self-administered cocaine (0.1 mg/kg/infusion) on a fixed ratio 1 schedule. We thus implemented a lever-cocaine "autoshaping" session followed by a series of manipulations changing dose and reinforcement schedule. Tg rats self-administered much less cocaine than WT rats throughout the study. Of 8 Tg rats, 5 modestly increased self-administration from sessions 36-50. Of those, only 3 showed a lever discrimination. Of 10 WT rats, 8 acquired robust self-administration by session 19; all WT rats self-administered cocaine by the end of the study. WT and Tg rats had similar baseline locomotor activity in the self-administration chamber suggesting that the low levels of cocaine intake in the Tg rats did not reflect a nonspecific motor impairment in this rat strain. Concomitant measurement of activity with self-administration revealed activity increases that followed increased cocaine intake. That relation held in Tg rats. Therefore, the present study provides evidence that HIV-1 Tg rats are less sensitive to the reinforcing effects of cocaine than their F344 WT counterparts.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".