Elsevier

Brain Research

Volume 623, Issue 2, 1 October 1993, Pages 341-344
Brain Research

Individual differences in the psychomotor effects of morphine are predicted by reactivity to novelty and influenced by corticosterone secretion

https://doi.org/10.1016/0006-8993(93)91451-WGet rights and content

Abstract

Clinical observations show that individual vulnerability to the reinforcing properties of drugs plays an important part in the subsequent development of addiction. In animals, individual vulnerability to psychostimulants has been found to be predicted by their locomotor response to novelty as well as their corticosterone response. Rats with a high locomotor response to novelty (High Responders or HR) relative to Low Responders (LR), show a higher sensitivity to both the psychomotor and reinforcing effects of psychostimulants and a longer lasting corticosterone secretion in response to stress. In this study, we addressed two main questions. First, does the locomotor response to novelty also predict the psychomotor effects of morphine? Second, do differences in corticosterone secretion underlie individual differences in the stimulant effects of morphine? We compared the locomotor response to morphine (2 mg/kg s.c.) in: (i) HR and LR rats with an intact hypothalamo-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis; (ii) HR and LR rats in which stress-induced corticosterone secretion was suppressed by adrenalectomy but basal levels of corticosterone were maintained by implantation of subcutaneous corticosterone pellets. In animals with an intact HPA axis, HR rats showed a higher locomotor response than did LRs to morphine. In animals in which corticosterone secretion was suppressed, the enhanced locomotor response of the HRs to morphine fell to that observed in the LRs. In conclusion our data show that, (1) individual reactivity to novelty can predict individual vulnerability to the psychomotor effects of opioids, and (2) stress-induced corticosterone secretion may play a role in determining individual differences in sensitivity to these drugs. These results are comparable to those observed with psychostimulants, and suggest that a common biological mechanism underlies individual vulnerability to the effects of both classes of drugs.

References (23)

  • ExnerM. et al.

    Behaviour in the novel environment predicts responsiveness to d-amphetamine in the rat: a multivariate approach

    Behav. Pharmac.

    (1993)
  • Cited by (96)

    • Behavioral medical epigenetics

      2021, Medical Epigenetics
    • Effects of early-life FGF2 on ultrasonic vocalizations (USVs) and the mu-opioid receptor in male Sprague-Dawley rats selectively-bred for differences in their response to novelty

      2019, Brain Research
      Citation Excerpt :

      The discovery of basal differences in opioid gene expression in bLR and bHR rats may also be of interest because the LR/HR model is commonly used to research individual differences in susceptibility to drug addiction in addition to individual differences in anxiety- and depression-like behavior (Flagel et al., 2010; Piazza et al., 1989). Previous studies using outbred rats with high and low responses to novelty have indicated that HR rats are more sensitive to the psychomotor effects of morphine (Deroche et al., 1993). Since morphine preferentially binds to the mu receptor, our results demonstrating elevated expression of mu receptor expression across multiple affective brain regions, including the nucleus accumbens, may provide insight into differences in drug sensitivity in the HR/LR model.

    • Individual differences in initial morphine sensitivity as a predictor for the development of opiate addiction in rats

      2016, Behavioural Brain Research
      Citation Excerpt :

      Third, potential biological mechanisms that contribute to the individual differences were not studied. Several potential mechanisms such as the dopamine system [45] and corticosterone stress hormone [14,46] have been previously proposed. Another study reported that mu-opioid receptor mRNA levels in the brain were not different between HR and LR rats [18].

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    This work was supported by the Institut National de la Santéet de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM), the universitéde Bordeaux II and the Conseil Régional d'Aquitaine.

    View full text