ArticlePsychopharmacology2017
Evaluation of training dose in male Sprague-Dawley rats trained to discriminate 4-methylmethcathinone.
Article in Psychopharmacology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Behavioral effects of four novel synthetic cathinone analogs in rodents.Addiction biology · 2021Article
- Methylenedioxymethamphetamine-like discriminative stimulus effects of seven cathinones in rats.Behavioural pharmacology · 2020Article
- Combined effects of mephedrone and cocaine on locomotor activity and conditioned place preference in male Sprague-Dawley rats.Behavioural pharmacology · 2020Article
- Locomotor activity and discriminative stimulus effects of five novel synthetic cathinone analogs in mice and rats.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2019Article
- Effects of cocaine on the discriminative stimulus and reinforcing effects of mephedrone in male rats.Psychopharmacology · 2019Article
- Effects of dopaminergic and serotonergic compounds in rats trained to discriminate a high and a low training dose of the synthetic cathinone mephedrone.Psychopharmacology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
rationaleAlthough the synthetic cathinone 4-methylmethcathinone (4-MMC, mephedrone) has been a subject of intensive research investigation, the pharmacological mechanisms involved in its interoceptive stimulus effects have yet to be fully characterized.
objectiveThe present study employed drug discrimination methods in rats to compare the interoceptive stimulus properties of two different training doses of 4-MMC to other substances with similar pharmacological actions.
methodsSixteen male Sprague-Dawley rats were trained to discriminate either 1.0 mg/kg (N = 8) or 3.0 mg/kg (N = 8) 4-MMC from saline. Substitution tests were conducted with drugs that increase extracellular monoamine levels (d-amphetamine, (+)-methamphetamine, 4-MMC, MDMA, MDPV, and (-)-cocaine), a serotonin releaser (+)-fenfluramine, and a serotonergic (5-HT
resultsStimulus control was established in fewer sessions in the subjects trained with 3.0 mg/kg compared to those trained with 1.0 mg/kg 4-MMC. Cocaine, MDMA, and d-amphetamine produced full substitution in the 1.0 mg/kg 4-MMC-trained rats at doses that did not decrease response rate. However, doses of test drugs that engendered > 80% 4-MMC-lever selection concurrently produced rate-decreasing effects in rats trained to discriminate 3.0 mg/kg 4-MMC.
conclusionsThese findings further characterize the interoceptive stimulus effects of 4-MMC and indicate that these effects vary little with training dose; however, qualitative differences in substitutability of test drugs were observed between training groups. This study expands existing knowledge regarding the psychopharmacology of 4-MMC and the potential neurochemical substrates contributing to its subjective effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.