{"title":"Dosage and Conditioning Period Determine Reward or Aversion to Cannabis-induced Conditioned Place Preference in Sprague-Dawley Rats","authors":"L. Young, Kp Chin-Quee","doi":"10.7727/WIMJ.2017.185","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To assess the addictive potential of cannabis by investigating the motivational responses to low doses of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (∆9-THC) and a marijuana tea extract (MTE), and to determine if the length of the conditioning period in the conditioned place preference (CPP) paradigm influences reward or aversion to these cannabinoid preparations. Methods: Thirty-eight Sprague-Dawley rats were taken through a biased CPP paradigm utilizing an eight-day schedule. The pre-conditioning phase consisted of three trials of 15 minutes each, and the conditioning phase lasted either 40 or 18 minutes in the drug-paired, ‘nonpreferred’ white chamber or the vehicle-paired, ‘preferred’ black chamber. Spontaneous motor activity (SMA) was used to determine the 18-minute conditioning period, dosage of a crude MTE and the oil-based vehicle for ∆9-THC (coconut oil), which did not alter the SMA of the rats. Differences in the mean times spent in the ‘non-preferred’ white chamber during the preconditioning and post-conditioning periods were compared using paired t-test. Results: Significant place aversion (p < 0.0001) to the MTE occurred at the 40-minute conditioning period, but not at the 18-minute period. Also, significant CPP reward (p < 0.01) to 0.05 mg/kg ∆9-THC occurred with the reduced 18-minute conditioning period, while a non-significant increase in post-conditioning time at the higher dose of 2.0 mg/kg ∆9-THC was obtained. Conclusion: Drug-seeking, motivational reward to 0.05 mg/kg ∆9-THC confirmed the addictive potential of ∆9-THC. However, the duration of the conditioning period in the CPP design was a determinant of the outcome to CPP-reward or -aversion to marijuana.","PeriodicalId":49366,"journal":{"name":"West Indian Medical Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"West Indian Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7727/WIMJ.2017.185","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To assess the addictive potential of cannabis by investigating the motivational responses to low doses of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (∆9-THC) and a marijuana tea extract (MTE), and to determine if the length of the conditioning period in the conditioned place preference (CPP) paradigm influences reward or aversion to these cannabinoid preparations. Methods: Thirty-eight Sprague-Dawley rats were taken through a biased CPP paradigm utilizing an eight-day schedule. The pre-conditioning phase consisted of three trials of 15 minutes each, and the conditioning phase lasted either 40 or 18 minutes in the drug-paired, ‘nonpreferred’ white chamber or the vehicle-paired, ‘preferred’ black chamber. Spontaneous motor activity (SMA) was used to determine the 18-minute conditioning period, dosage of a crude MTE and the oil-based vehicle for ∆9-THC (coconut oil), which did not alter the SMA of the rats. Differences in the mean times spent in the ‘non-preferred’ white chamber during the preconditioning and post-conditioning periods were compared using paired t-test. Results: Significant place aversion (p < 0.0001) to the MTE occurred at the 40-minute conditioning period, but not at the 18-minute period. Also, significant CPP reward (p < 0.01) to 0.05 mg/kg ∆9-THC occurred with the reduced 18-minute conditioning period, while a non-significant increase in post-conditioning time at the higher dose of 2.0 mg/kg ∆9-THC was obtained. Conclusion: Drug-seeking, motivational reward to 0.05 mg/kg ∆9-THC confirmed the addictive potential of ∆9-THC. However, the duration of the conditioning period in the CPP design was a determinant of the outcome to CPP-reward or -aversion to marijuana.
期刊介绍:
The Journal is international in scope, with author and editorial contributions from across the globe. The focus is on clinical and epidemiological aspects of tropical and infectious diseases, new and re-emerging infections, chronic non-communicable diseases, and medical conditions prevalent in the Latin America-Caribbean region, and of significance to global health, especially in developing countries. The Journal covers all medical disciplines, as well as basic and translational research elucidating the pathophysiologic basis of diseases or focussing on new therapeutic approaches, and publishes original scientific research, reviews, case reports, brief communications, letters, commentaries and medical images. The Journal publishes four to six issues and four supplements annually. English is the language of publication but Abstracts are also duplicated in Spanish. Most of the articles are submitted at the authors’ initiative, but some are solicited by the Editor-in-Chief. Unless expressly stated, the Editorial Board does not accept responsibility for authors’ opinions.
All papers on submission are reviewed by a subcommittee. Those deemed worthy for review are sent to two or three reviewers (one of the three might be a statistician if necessary). The returned papers with reviewer comments are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief. Papers may be rejected, accepted or sent back to authors for revision. Resubmitted papers from authors are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief and may be sent back to reviewers or a final decision made by Editor-in-Chief. The decision of the Editorial Board is final with regards to rejected articles. Rejected articles will not be returned to the authors. The editorial subcommittee has the right to return sub-standard manuscripts to the authors, rather than passing them on to the reviewers. This implies outright rejection of the manuscript.