The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Reduction of cocaine place preference in mice lacking the protein phosphatase 1 inhibitors DARPP 32 or Inhibitor 1
Abstract
Background Modulation of protein phosphorylation by dopamine is thought to play an important role in drug reward. Protein phosphatase-1 (PP-1) is known to mediate some of the changes in neuronal signaling that occur following activation of the dopaminergic system.Methods Two endogenous inhibitors of PP-1 are dopamine and cyclic 3', 5' adenosine monophosphate-regulated phosphoprotein (DARPP-32) and Inhibitor-1 (I-1). Knockout mice lacking one or both of these PP-1 inhibitors were tested for responses to cocaine using in vivo amperometry and conditioned place preference.Results Presynaptic dopaminergic function appears to be unaffected by these mutations because stimulation-evoked changes in extracellular dopamine levels were unchanged between wild type mice and mice lacking one or both of these PP-1 inhibitors. In contrast, conditioned place preference to cocaine is reduced in mice lacking DARPP-32, I-1, or both phosphoproteins. This does not appear to be due to a learning deficit because mice lacking both DARPP-32 and I-1 show normal passive avoidance learning.Conclusions These data imply that increased PP-1 function as a result of deficits in DARPP-32 or I-1 is sufficient to decrease the rewarding properties of cocaine. Furthermore, the mechanism for this altered cocaine place preference does not involve alteration of dopamine release or reuptake.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“Support for this concept is provided in genetic models in mice lacking the DARPP-32 gene, which results in decreased responses to cocaine in conditioned place preference behaviors [85].”
From Reward circuitry dysfunction in psychiatric and neurodevelopmental disorders and genetic syndromes: animal models and clinical findings (2012) · cites this paper as [85]
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 44 · Cited by 84
Metadata
- Authors
- Zachariou, V., Benoit-Marand, M., Allen, P. B., Ingrassia, P., Fienberg, A. A., Gonon, F., Greengard, P., & Picciotto, M. R.
- Affiliations
- Yale University (US)
- Rockefeller University (US)
- Venue
- Biological Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2002-04
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 612-620
- ISSN
- 0006-3223 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1970290214
- Cited by
- 84
- References
- 44
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 2.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Biological Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA 08227, DA10044, P01DA010044, DA 00436, P01DA008227)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
- Keywords
- cocaine, conditioned place preference, protein phosphatase 1, DARPP-32, inhibitor-1, dopamine, drug reward, knockout mice, presynaptic dopamine release, passive avoidance learning, protein phosphorylation
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Avoidance Learning, Behavior, Animal, Cocaine, Corpus Striatum, Dopamine, Electric Stimulation, Electrochemistry, Male, Motor Activity, Nerve Tissue Proteins, Phosphoprotein Phosphatases, Phosphoproteins, Proteins, Mice, Knockout, Dopamine Uptake Inhibitors, Mice, Dopamine and cAMP-Regulated Phosphoprotein 32, Protein Phosphatase 1
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