Repeated stressful experiences differently affect limbic dopamine release during and following stress
Abstract
The effects of repeated restraint stress exposures (daily 60 min, for 6 days) on extracellular dopamine in the nucleus accumbens, during and after the stress experience, have been investigated in rats by in vivo microdialysis. On the first day, restraint increased dopamine release during the first 40 min followed by a return to basal levels (50-60 min later). As soon as restraint ceased and the rats were set free, there was another increase in dopamine release lasting 40 min. On the second and third day, restraint produced only a slight increase in dopamine release, while no significant changes were evident from the fourth to the sixth day. By contrast, from the second to the sixth day the increase in dopamine release observed once rats were freed, was unchanged in comparison to the first day. The present results show that the activation of the mesolimbic dopaminergic system induced by aversive stimuli adapts to repeated experiences differently from that produced by pleasurable events, suggesting that aversive and rewarding experiences involve different neural systems.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Decreased DA release to the NAc occurs after exposure to chronic repeated or unavoidable stress in rats, suggesting that stress significantly reduces mesolimbic DA transmission in rodent models.
“Decreased DA release to the NAc has been shown to occur after exposure to chronic repeated or an unavoidable stress regimen in rats [189,197,198], suggesting that stress significantly reduces mesolimbic DA transmission in rodent models.”
From Reward circuitry dysfunction in psychiatric and neurodevelopmental disorders and genetic syndromes: animal models and clinical findings (2012) · cites this paper as [197]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 27 · Cited by 256
- Authors
- Imperato, A., Angelucci, L., Casolini, P., Zocchi, A., & Puglisi-Allegra, S.
- Affiliations
- Sapienza University of Rome (IT)
- Venue
- Brain Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1992-04
- Volume
- 577
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 194-199
- ISSN
- 0006-8993 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1999394080
- Cited by
- 256
- References
- 27
- Citations by year
- 2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 4.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Brain Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- IRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
- Keywords
- repeated restraint stress, dopamine release, nucleus accumbens, mesolimbic dopamine system, stress adaptation, aversive stimuli, reward, limbic system, in vivo microdialysis
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Catheters, Indwelling, Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid, Dialysis, Dopamine, Haloperidol, Homovanillic Acid, Male, Nucleus Accumbens, Rats, Inbred Strains, Restraint, Physical, Stress, Physiological, Time Factors, 3,4-Dihydroxyphenylacetic Acid, Rats
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review