Ruob C, Elsner J, Weiner I, Feldon J
Laboratory of Behavioural Biology and Functional Toxicology, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Schwerzenbach, Switzerland.
Behav Brain Res. 1997 Oct;88(1):35-41. doi: 10.1016/s0166-4328(97)02305-x.
If a stimulus (e.g. light) is repeatedly preexposed without consequences, it subsequently develops a weaker association with a reinforcer (e.g. foot shock) than does a non-preexposed stimulus. This retarded conditioning to the preexposed as compared to the non-preexposed stimulus, is latent inhibition (LI). It is well documented that LI is disrupted by low doses of amphetamine and potentiated by neuroleptic drugs, and there is evidence that the action of these agents on LI can be modified by changes in the parameters of preexposure or conditioning. The present experiments tested whether the effects of DA agents on LI are influenced by the nature of the stimulus. In two experiments, LI was assessed using an off-baseline conditioned emotional response (CER) procedure in rats licking for water, consisting of three stages: preexposure, in which the stimulus (a light) to be conditioned, was repeatedly presented without being followed by reinforcement; conditioning, in which the preexposed stimulus was paired with reinforcement (a foot-shock); and test, in which LI was indexed by animals' degree of suppression of licking during stimulus presentation. In both experiments, different groups of animals were preexposed and conditioned with four different preexposed visual stimuli: three steady side-lights, three flashing side-lights, one flashing side-light, and a flashing houselight. Experiment 1 used 40 stimulus preexposures and tested the effects of 1 mg/kg D-amphetamine, whereas experiment 2 used 10 preexposures and tested the effects of 0.1 mg/kg haloperidol. The results showed that of the four stimuli used, both drugs were effective with only one and the same stimulus, namely, flashing houselight. This demonstrates that the disruptive effect of amphetamine and the potentiating effect of haloperidol on LI, are modifiable by manipulating the nature of the preexposed stimulus.
如果一个刺激(如光)被反复预暴露而无任何结果,那么与未预暴露的刺激相比,它随后与强化物(如足部电击)形成的关联会更弱。与未预暴露的刺激相比,这种对预暴露刺激的条件作用延迟,就是潜伏抑制(LI)。有充分的文献记载,低剂量的苯丙胺会破坏潜伏抑制,而抗精神病药物会增强潜伏抑制,并且有证据表明,这些药物对潜伏抑制的作用会因预暴露或条件作用参数的变化而改变。本实验测试了多巴胺能药物对潜伏抑制的影响是否受刺激性质的影响。在两个实验中,使用一种偏离基线的条件性情绪反应(CER)程序在舔水的大鼠中评估潜伏抑制,该程序包括三个阶段:预暴露阶段,将待条件化的刺激(一盏灯)反复呈现且不给予强化;条件化阶段,将预暴露的刺激与强化物(足部电击)配对;测试阶段,通过动物在刺激呈现期间舔舐行为的抑制程度来衡量潜伏抑制。在两个实验中,不同组的动物用四种不同的预暴露视觉刺激进行预暴露和条件化:三盏稳定的侧灯、三盏闪烁的侧灯、一盏闪烁的侧灯和一盏闪烁的顶灯。实验1使用40次刺激预暴露,并测试了1毫克/千克D - 苯丙胺的效果,而实验2使用10次预暴露,并测试了0.1毫克/千克氟哌啶醇的效果。结果表明,在所使用的四种刺激中,两种药物仅对一种且相同的刺激有效,即闪烁的顶灯。这表明,苯丙胺的破坏作用和氟哌啶醇对潜伏抑制的增强作用,可通过操纵预暴露刺激的性质来改变。