Double dissociation of perirhinal nicotinic acetylcholine receptors and dopamine D2 receptors in modulation of object memory consolidation by nicotine, cocaine and their conditioned stimuli
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are indications that drug conditioned stimuli (CS) may activate neurochemical systems of memory modulation that are activated by the drugs themselves. To directly test this hypothesis, a cholinergic nicotinic receptor antagonist (mecamylamine; MEC: 0, 10 or 30 µg/side) and a dopamine D2 receptor antagonist (l-741,626: 0, 0.63, 2.5 µg/side) were infused in the perirhinal cortex (PRh) to block modulation of object recognition memory consolidation induced by 0.4 mg/kg nicotine, 20 mg/kg cocaine, or their CSs. To establish these CSs, male Sprague-Dawley rats were confined for 2 h in a chamber, the CS+, after injections of 0.4 mg/kg nicotine, or 20 mg/kg cocaine, and in another chamber, the CS-, after injections of vehicle. This was repeated over 10 days (5 drug/CS+ and 5 vehicle/CS- pairings in total). It was found that the memory enhancing action of post-sample nicotine was blocked by intra-PRh infusions of both MEC doses, and 30 µg/side MEC also blocked the memory enhancing action of the nicotine CS. Interestingly, intra-PRh MEC did not block the memory enhancing effect of cocaine, nor that of the cocaine CS. In contrast, the memory enhancing action of post-sample cocaine administration was blocked by both l-741,626 doses, and 2.5 µg/side also blocked the effect of the cocaine CS, but not the memory effects of nicotine or of the nicotine CS. This functional double dissociation strongly indicates that drug CSs modulate memory consolidation by activating neural systems that are activated by the drugs themselves.
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".