Rodríguez Echandía E L, Broitman S T, Fóscolo M R
Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 1987 Feb;26(2):207-10. doi: 10.1016/0091-3057(87)90106-7.
The effect of the chronic ingestion of chlorimipramine (CI) or desipramine (DS) on the alterations of hole board behavior caused by a model stress (2 IP injections of physiological saline) and by a short restraint stress (5 min) is analyzed in this study. The experimental groups ingested about 3 mg/kg/24 hr CI or DS for 15 days. Then some experimental and control rats were assigned to control of drug effects on baseline activity. The remaining rats were submitted to saline stress (Experiment I) or restraint stress (Experiment II). The baseline scores of hole board locomotion, head dipping, grooming and defecation were not affected by DS treatment but locomotion slightly increased in the CI treated group. Saline stress impaired significantly head dipping and caused excessive grooming in control rats. The CI treatment induced almost full protection against these behavioral effects of saline stress but DS treatment was ineffective. Restraint stress was found to cause a pronounced inhibition of head dipping as well as a great increase of the scores of grooming in the control group. The CI treatment clearly attenuated these effects of restraint but DS treatment was not effective. The results suggest that male rats treated chronically with CI tolerated both acute stresses better than untreated rats, and that a similar treatment with DS did not provide protection against the effect of such stresses on hole board responding. Inasmuch as CI and DS have different relative potency at noradrenergic and serotonergic systems, it is speculated that this might be in part responsible for their differences as stress protectors.
本研究分析了长期摄入氯米帕明（CI）或地昔帕明（DS）对由模型应激（腹腔注射2次生理盐水）和短期束缚应激（5分钟）引起的洞板行为改变的影响。实验组连续15天摄入约3mg/kg/24小时的CI或DS。然后，将一些实验组和对照组大鼠用于控制药物对基线活动的影响。其余大鼠接受生理盐水应激（实验I）或束缚应激（实验II）。DS处理不影响洞板运动、探首、理毛和排便的基线分数，但CI处理组的运动略有增加。生理盐水应激显著损害了对照组大鼠的探首行为，并导致过度理毛。CI处理几乎完全保护了大鼠免受生理盐水应激的这些行为影响，但DS处理无效。发现束缚应激导致对照组大鼠的探首行为明显受到抑制，理毛分数大幅增加。CI处理明显减轻了束缚应激的这些影响，但DS处理无效。结果表明，长期用CI处理的雄性大鼠比未处理的大鼠对两种急性应激的耐受性更好，而用DS进行类似处理并不能保护大鼠免受此类应激对洞板反应的影响。由于CI和DS在去甲肾上腺素能和5-羟色胺能系统具有不同的相对效价，推测这可能部分解释了它们作为应激保护剂的差异。
