{"title":"Actions and pharmacokinetic properties of the α2‐adrenergic agents, medetomidine and atipamezole, in rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss)","authors":"T. E. Horsberg, J. Burka, R. Tasker","doi":"10.1111/J.1467-2995.1999.TB00179.X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"SUMMARY The effects of medetomidine and atipamezole were examined in rainbow trout. Medetomidine proved to be an effective sedative but not an anaesthetic; its effects were antagonised by atipamezole. The clinical signs of medetomidine sedation were rapid settling to the bottom of the tank followed by progressive ataxia. The sedative effect was dose-dependent: at 1 mg/l, one of 6 fish rested on its side after 10 min, whereas at 20 mg/l all 6 rested on their sides. No loss of consciousness occurred. Atipamezole at 6 times the medetomidine concentration antagonised sedation. The average time before fish exposed to medetomidine alone showed avoidance reactions was 10 h, more than 5 times longer than the mean time in fish exposed to medetomidine and then atipamezole. During exposure to medetomidine (5 mg/l) opercular movement rate decreased from 80/min to 20/min. The nature of opercular excursions also changed from being rapid and shallow to slow and deep. Respiratory movements increased after transfer to the bath containing atipamezole. Medetomidine had a marked effect upon skin colour, with fish becoming very pale a few min after exposure. Normal pigmentation was not restored until 4.5 days after exposure to medetomidine alone, but returned to normal after 10 min exposure to atipamezole solution. The half-life ( t 1 / 2 lambda z ) for medetomidine was 5.5 h. For atipamezole, it was 8.6 h.","PeriodicalId":100854,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Veterinary Anaesthesia","volume":"95 1","pages":"18-22"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Veterinary Anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1467-2995.1999.TB00179.X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13
Abstract
SUMMARY The effects of medetomidine and atipamezole were examined in rainbow trout. Medetomidine proved to be an effective sedative but not an anaesthetic; its effects were antagonised by atipamezole. The clinical signs of medetomidine sedation were rapid settling to the bottom of the tank followed by progressive ataxia. The sedative effect was dose-dependent: at 1 mg/l, one of 6 fish rested on its side after 10 min, whereas at 20 mg/l all 6 rested on their sides. No loss of consciousness occurred. Atipamezole at 6 times the medetomidine concentration antagonised sedation. The average time before fish exposed to medetomidine alone showed avoidance reactions was 10 h, more than 5 times longer than the mean time in fish exposed to medetomidine and then atipamezole. During exposure to medetomidine (5 mg/l) opercular movement rate decreased from 80/min to 20/min. The nature of opercular excursions also changed from being rapid and shallow to slow and deep. Respiratory movements increased after transfer to the bath containing atipamezole. Medetomidine had a marked effect upon skin colour, with fish becoming very pale a few min after exposure. Normal pigmentation was not restored until 4.5 days after exposure to medetomidine alone, but returned to normal after 10 min exposure to atipamezole solution. The half-life ( t 1 / 2 lambda z ) for medetomidine was 5.5 h. For atipamezole, it was 8.6 h.