 |
Previous Article | Next Article 
Toward Understanding the Biology of a Complex Phenotype: Rat
Strain and Substrain Differences in the Sensorimotor Gating-Disruptive
Effects of Dopamine Agonists
Neal R.
Swerdlow,
Zoe A.
Martinez,
Faith M.
Hanlon,
Amanda
Platten,
Marjan
Farid,
Pamela
Auerbach,
David L.
Braff, and
Mark A.
Geyer
Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San
Diego, La Jolla, California 92093-0804
Sensorimotor gating, measured by prepulse inhibition (PPI) of the
startle reflex, is reduced in schizophrenia patients and in rats
treated with dopamine agonists. Strain differences in the sensitivity
to the PPI-disruptive effects of dopamine agonists may provide insight
into the genetic basis for human population differences in sensorimotor
gating. We reported strain differences in the sensitivity to the
PPI-disruptive effects of the D1/D2 agonist apomorphine in adult rats,
with greater sensitivity in Harlan Sprague Dawley (SDH) versus Wistar
(WH) rats. However, Kinney et al. (1999) recently reported opposite
findings, using Bantin-Kingman Sprague Dawley (SDBK) and Wistar (WBK)
rats; in fact, SDBK rats did not exhibit clear apomorphine-induced
reductions in sensorimotor gating. These new findings of Kinney et al.
(1999) directly conflict with over 15 years of results from our
laboratories and challenge interpretations from a large body of
literature. The present studies carefully assessed drug effects on
sensorimotor gating in SD versus W strains, across rat suppliers (H vs
BK). Significantly greater SDH than WH apomorphine sensitivity in PPI measures was observed in both adult and 18 d pups, confirming that
these strain differences are both robust and innate. These strain
differences in apomorphine sensitivity were not found in adult BK rats.
Supplier differences in sensitivity (SDH > SDBK) were also
evident in the PPI-disruptive effects of D1 but not D2-family agonists;
PPI was clearly disrupted by quinpirole in both SDH and SDBK rats.
These findings demonstrate robust, innate, neurochemically specific,
and apparently heritable phenotypic differences in an animal model of
sensorimotor gating deficits in human neuropsychiatric disorders.
Key words:
apomorphine; dopamine; prepulse inhibition; schizophrenia; startle; strain
Copyright © 2000 Society for Neuroscience 0270-6474/00/20114325-12$05.00/0
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. F. Green, P. D. Butler, Y. Chen, M. A. Geyer, S. Silverstein, J. K. Wynn, J. H. Yoon, and V. Zemon
Perception Measurement in Clinical Trials of Schizophrenia: Promising Paradigms From CNTRICS
Schizophr Bull,
January 1, 2009;
35(1):
163 - 181.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. Heekeren, A. Neukirch, J. Daumann, M. Stoll, M. Obradovic, K.-A. Kovar, M.A. Geyer, and E. GouzouLis-Mayfrank
Prepulse inhibition of the startle reflex and its attentional modulation in the human S-ketamine and N,N-dimethyltryptamine (DMT) models of psychosis
J Psychopharmacol,
May 1, 2007;
21(3):
312 - 320.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. Fitting, R. M. Booze, and C. F. Mactutus
Neonatal Intrahippocampal Glycoprotein 120 Injection: The Role of Dopaminergic Alterations in Prepulse Inhibition in Adult Rats
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther.,
September 1, 2006;
318(3):
1352 - 1358.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. J. Ralph and S. B. Caine
Dopamine D1 and D2 Agonist Effects on Prepulse Inhibition and Locomotion: Comparison of Sprague-Dawley Rats to Swiss-Webster, 129X1/SvJ, C57BL/6J, and DBA/2J Mice
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther.,
February 1, 2005;
312(2):
733 - 741.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. E. Culm and R. P. Hammer Jr.
Recovery of Sensorimotor Gating without G Protein Adaptation after Repeated D2-Like Dopamine Receptor Agonist Treatment in Rats
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther.,
February 1, 2004;
308(2):
487 - 494.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. J. Ralph, M. P. Paulus, and M. A. Geyer
Strain-Specific Effects of Amphetamine on Prepulse Inhibition and Patterns of Locomotor Behavior in Mice
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther.,
July 1, 2001;
298(1):
148 - 155.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
|
 |
|
|

|