Exploring behavioral and molecular mechanisms of nicotine reward in adolescent mice
Open accessAbstract
Tobacco smoking during adolescence has become a prominent preventable health problem faced in the United States. Addictive properties of smoking are thought to have a pronounced effect at a young age, thereby increasing vulnerability to a life-long addiction and decreasing the likelihood of smoking cessation during adulthood. Learning and memory involvement in nicotine reward was assessed in early adolescent (PND 28–34) and adult (PND 70+) male ICR mice by conducting conditioning sessions of nicotine (0.5 mg/kg) acquisition at varying time-spans, and evaluating extinction and reinstatement of nicotine preference using Conditioned Place Preference. Acquisition studies resulted in a significant preference for nicotine after 3 days of conditioning for both age groups, but not after only 1 or 2 conditioning days. In the extinction study, adolescent mice exhibited preference for nicotine 72 h after the last conditioning session, whereas preference for nicotine was extinct in adult mice by 72 h. Reinstatement studies showed adolescent mice, but not adult mice, recovering nicotine preference after a priming injection of 0.1 mg/kg nicotine on day 9 after the mice underwent extinction. No significant differences were found when nAChRs were quantified in both early adolescent and adult mice using binding techniques including cytisine sensitive, α-conotoxin-MII sensitive, and α-bungarotoxin sensitive nAChRs. Levels of striatal dopamine release were measured in both age groups using a dopamine release assay over a range of nicotine doses, which also resulted in no significant differences. More sensitive assays may facilitate in understanding the mechanisms of nicotine reward in adolescent mice.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Across the seven CPP studies, increased CPP was found in adolescent-exposed rats and mice as compared to adult-exposed and their relative age-matched controls when tested the following day after conditioning.
“Across the seven studies, increased CPP was found in adolescent-exposed rats and mice as compared to adult-exposed and their relative age-matched controls when tested the following day after conditioning”
From Age-dependent Effects of Tobacco Smoke and Nicotine on Cognition and the Brain: A Systematic Review of the Human and Animal Literature Comparing Adolescents and Adults. (2023) · cites this paper as Kota et al., 2011
Results §3.1 reports that adolescent mice showed nicotine CPP at lower doses than adults, supporting an age-related difference in mice. But this paper does not report results across seven studies or in rats. Results §3.2 says that, when tested the following day after three conditioning sessions at 0.5 mg/kg, both age groups showed CPP and its intensity did not differ between them; page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThese findings suggest adolescent rodents may retain nicotine-paired cues and contextual signs for a longer period than adults, resulting in the risk of increased nicotine-seeking.
“These findings suggest adolescent rodents may retain nicotine-paired cues and contextual signs for a longer period than adults, resulting in the risk of increased nicotine-seeking”
From Age-dependent Effects of Tobacco Smoke and Nicotine on Cognition and the Brain: A Systematic Review of the Human and Animal Literature Comparing Adolescents and Adults. (2023) · cites this paper as Kota et al., 2011
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 31 · Cited by 22
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [38]Chen J Millar WT Age of smoking initiation: implications for quitting. Health Rep 1998 9 39 46 9836879
- Authors
- Kota, D., Sanjakdar, S., Marks, M. J., Khabour, O., Alzoubi, K., & Damaj, M. I.
- Affiliations
- Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
- University of Colorado Boulder (US)
- Jordan University of Science and Technology (JO)
- Corresponding author
- Damaj, M. Imad
- Venue
- Biochemical Pharmacology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2011-10
- Volume
- 82
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1008-1014
- ISSN
- 0006-2952 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3821840
- OpenAlex
- W2072040192
- Semantic Scholar
- 9a21f543b5f0c656ee9c4859373e2cabbf152c25
- Cited by
- 22
- References
- 31
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 1.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Biochemical Pharmacology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA012610, DA-12610)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors Study
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Keywords
- nicotine reward, adolescent smoking, nicotine preference, conditioned place preference, nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, striatal dopamine release
- MeSH terms
- Aging, Animals, Brain, Cell Membrane, Conditioning, Operant, Dopamine, Exploratory Behavior, Male, Mice, Inbred ICR, Nicotine, Protein Binding, Receptors, Nicotinic, Reward, Mice
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