ISSN:
1432-2072
Keywords:
Nicotine
;
Mecamylamine
;
Lobeline
;
ABT-418
;
A-82695
;
Attention
;
Vigilance
Source:
Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2000
Topics:
Medicine
Notes:
Abstract The effects of nicotinic receptor ligands on performance in a task measuring sustained attention, or vigilance, were tested. This task required the animals to discriminate between signal and non-signal events. The sequence of signal (central panel light illumination for 500, 50 or 25 ms) and non-signal presentations was randomized over three blocks of 54 trials each (27 signal trials, 9 per length, and 27 non-signal trials). A left lever press following a signal was counted as a hit, and a right lever press following a non-signal event was counted as a correct rejection. Hits and correct rejections were rewarded, whereas misses and false alarms (defined as incorrect right and left lever presses, respectively) were not. Baseline performance was characterized by a signal length dependent ability of the animals to discriminate between signal and non-signal events. Administration of nicotine (0.19, 0.62, 1.9 µmol) or of two novel nicotinic receptor agonists, ABT-418 and A-82695, did not produce main effects on vigilance performance. Lobeline (1.9, 6.2, 19 µmol), a nicotinic receptor ligand with mixed agonist/antagonist activities, impaired the animals' ability to discriminate between signal and non-signal events. The antagonist mecamylamine (5, 15, 50 µmol) potently impaired performance while increasing the number of errors of omission. The lack of effect of nicotine largely corresponds with the findings from previous studies on the acute effects of nicotine in intact subjects and nonsmoking humans. While the detrimental effects of lobeline may have been related to the antagonist effects of this compound, the reasons for the differences between the effects of nicotine and lobeline still remain unsettled. These data support the hypothesis that nicotine receptor mechanisms are maximally activated in intact animals performing this task, and suggest that effects of acute nicotinic agonist treatment would not produce further cognitive benefit for these animals.
Type of Medium:
Electronic Resource
URL:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02245840
Permalink
