Discordant Effects of Cannabinoid 2 Receptor Antagonism/Inverse Agonism During Adolescence on Pavlovian and Instrumental Reward Learning in Adult Male Rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The endocannabinoid system is responsible for regulating a spectrum of physiological activities and plays a critical role in the developing brain. During adolescence, the endocannabinoid system is particularly sensitive to external insults that may change the brain’s developmental trajectory. Cannabinoid receptor type 2 (CB2R) was initially thought to predominantly function in the peripheral nervous system, but more recent studies have implicated its role in the mesolimbic pathway, a network largely attributed to reward circuitry and reward motivated behavior, which undergoes extensive changes during adolescence. It is therefore important to understand how CB2R modulation during adolescence can impact reward-related behaviors in adulthood. In this study, adolescent male rats (postnatal days 28–41) were exposed to a low or high dose of the CB2R antagonist/inverse agonist SR144528 and Pavlovian autoshaping and instrumental conditional behavioral outcomes were measured in adulthood. SR144528-treated rats had significantly slower acquisition of the autoshaping task, seen by less lever pressing behavior over time [F(2, 19) = 5.964, p = 0.010]. Conversely, there was no effect of adolescent SR144528 exposure on instrumental conditioning. These results suggest that modulation of the CB2R in adolescence differentially impacts reward-learning behaviors in adulthood.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".