The behavioral actions of lithium in rodent models: Leads to develop novel therapeutics
Open accessAbstract
For nearly as long as lithium has been in clinical use for the treatment of bipolar disorder, depression, and other conditions, investigators have attempted to characterize its effects on behaviors in rodents. Lithium consistently decreases exploratory activity, rearing, aggression, and amphetamine-induced hyperlocomotion; and it increases the sensitivity to pilocarpine-induced seizures, decreases immobility time in the forced swim test, and attenuates reserpine-induced hypolocomotion. Lithium also predictably induces conditioned taste aversion and alterations in circadian rhythms. The modulation of stereotypy, sensitization, and reward behavior are less consistent actions of the drug. These behavioral models may be relevant to human symptoms and to clinical endophenotypes. It is likely that the actions of lithium in a subset of these animal models are related to the therapeutic efficacy, as well the side effects, of the drug. We conclude with a brief discussion of various molecular mechanisms by which these lithium-sensitive behaviors may be mediated, and comment on the ways in which rat and mouse models can be used more effectively in the future to address persistent questions about the therapeutically relevant molecular actions of lithium.
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?
Possible mechanisms include an effect on aggression or impulsivity, both of which are associated with an increased risk of suicide.
“Possible mechanisms include an effect on aggression or impulsivity, both of which are associated with an increased risk of suicide.32 34”
From Lithium in the prevention of suicide in mood disorders: updated systematic review and meta-analysis (2013) · cites this paper as [34]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 291 · Cited by 137
- Authors
- O’Donnell, K. C., & Gould, T. D.
- Affiliations
- National Institutes of Health (US)
- Corresponding author
- Gould, Todd D.
- Venue
- Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2007-01
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 932-962
- ISSN
- 0149-7634 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC2150568
- OpenAlex
- W2095377373
- Cited by
- 137
- References
- 291
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 9
- FWCI
- 1.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (NIH0010875152)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Bipolar Disorder and Treatment
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Keywords
- lithium, rodent models, bipolar disorder, depression, exploratory activity, aggression, hyperlocomotion, pilocarpine-induced seizures, forced swim test, conditioned taste aversion, circadian rhythm, stereotypy, reward behavior, endophenotypes, adverse drug reactions, therapeutics
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Behavior, Animal, Bipolar Disorder, Depressive Disorder, Disease Models, Animal, Humans, Mice, Inbred Strains, Rats, Inbred Strains, Species Specificity, Lithium Compounds, Mice, 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