Persistent and delayed behavioral changes after nicotine treatment in adolescent rats
Abstract
Despite the increasing use of tobacco by adolescents, few animal studies have addressed the neurobehavioral consequences of nicotine exposure during this period. We administered nicotine to adolescent rats via continuous infusion on postnatal days (PN) 30 through 47.5, using a dosage regimen that maintains plasma levels similar to those found in smokers or in users of the transdermal nicotine patch. Behavior in a novel open field and learning a passive avoidance task were assessed during nicotine treatment and for 2 weeks post-treatment. On PN44, during nicotine exposure, female rats showed decreased grooming, an effect not seen in males; this effect is opposite to the effects of nicotine in adult rats. Two weeks after cessation of nicotine administration, females showed deficits in locomotor activity and rearing, whereas males again were unaffected; the behavioral deficits appeared at the same age at which gender-selective brain cell damage emerges. In contrast, nicotine exposure enhanced passive avoidance, with the effect intensifying and persisting throughout the post-treatment period. These results reinforce the concept that developmental vulnerability to nicotine extends into adolescence, with patterns of drug effects different from those in earlier or later periods. The correlation of neurochemical with behavioral effects strengthens the connection between adolescent nicotine exposure and persistent functional changes that may influence drug habituation, learning and me…
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?
Adolescent, but not post-adolescent, treatment with nicotine results in diminished cognitive function as adults, with reduced attention span and enhanced impulsivity.
“Adolescent, but not post-adolescent, treatment with nicotine has been shown to result in diminished cognitive function as adults with reduced attention span and enhanced impulsivity (Trauth et al. 2000; Counotte et al. 2009; Counotte et al. 2011).”
From <scp>N</scp> icotine and the adolescent brain (2015) · cites this paper as Trauth et al. 2000
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 36 · Cited by 124
- Authors
- Trauth, J. A., Seidler, F. J., & Slotkin, T. A.
- Affiliations
- Duke Medical Center (US)
- Corresponding author
- Slotkin, T.A.
- ORCID
- Slotkin, T.A.
- Venue
- Brain Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2000-10
- Volume
- 880
- Issue
- 1-2
- Pages
- 167-172
- ISSN
- 0006-8993 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1984566137
- Cited by
- 124
- References
- 36
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 4.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Brain Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors Study
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Substance Exposure Effects
- Keywords
- adolescent nicotine exposure, nicotine, developmental vulnerability, sex differences, grooming, locomotor activity, passive avoidance, learning and memory, neurobehavioral effects
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Animals, Avoidance Learning, Female, Grooming, Humans, Male, Motor Activity, Nicotine, Sex Characteristics, Smoking, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, 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