Cited by 182Cannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchMedicinal Plant Extracts EffectsMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Effects of cannabidiol and diazepam on behavioral and cardiovascular responses induced by contextual conditioned fear in rats

Resstel, Leonardo B.M., Joca, Sâmia R.L., Moreira, Fabrício A., Corrêa, Fernando M.A., Guimarães, Francisco S.·2006·Behavioural Brain Research

Abstract

Cannabidiol (CBD) is a non-psychotomimetic compound from Cannabis sativa that induces anxiolytic-like effects similar to diazepam in animal models of innate aversive behavior. However, the effects of CBD contextual conditioned fear have not been studied. Therefore, the aim of this work was to compare the behavioral and cardiovascular effects of CBD and diazepam, a prototype anxiolytic, in animals submitted to a contextual conditioned fear paradigm. Male Wistar rats were submitted to a 10min conditioning session (six footshocks, 2.5 mA, 3s, delivered at pseudo-random intervals). The behavioral and cardiovascular responses to the context were measured 24h later in a 10 min test session. Diazepam (2.5 mg/kg), FG-7142 (8 mg/kg), a benzodiazepine inverse agonist, or CBD (10 mg/kg) were administered i.p. before the test session. Conditioned rats submitted to the aversive context exhibited more freezing behavior and a larger increase in blood pressure and heart rate as compared to non-conditioned animals. These effects were attenuated by CBD and diazepam in the conditioned animals. These drugs did not have any effect in non-conditioned rats. FG-7142 treatment failed to change the behavioral and cardiovascular responses to the aversive context. In conclusion, the results suggest that CBD has anxiolytic-like properties similar to those of diazepam in a rat model of conditioned fear to context.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.bbr.2006.05.016

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Resstel, L. B. M., Joca, S. R. L., Moreira, F. A., Corrêa, F. M. A., & Guimarães, F. S.
Affiliations
Universidade de São Paulo (BR)
Corresponding author
Guimarães, Francisco S.
Venue
Behavioural Brain Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-09
Volume
172
Issue
2
Pages
294-298
ISSN
0166-4328 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2068728468
Cited by
182
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 15
FWCI
5.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Behavioural Brain Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Medicinal Plant Extracts Effects
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
cannabidiol, diazepam, anxiolytic effects, cardiovascular response, blood pressure, heart rate, freezing behavior, benzodiazepine inverse agonist, FG 7142, cannabis
MeSH terms
Analysis of Variance, Animals, Association Learning, Blood Pressure, Cannabidiol, Carbolines, Conditioning, Classical, Diazepam, Environment, Fear, Heart Rate, Male, Anti-Anxiety Agents, Rats, Wistar, Freezing Reaction, Cataleptic, 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