Cited by 127Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchCoffee research and impacts

d-amphetamine, cocaine and caffeine: a comparative study of acute effects on locomotor activity and behavioural patterns in rats

Antoniou, K, Kafetzopoulos, E, Papadopoulou-Daifoti, Z, Hyphantis, T, Marselos, M·1998·Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

Abstract

Although open-field behaviour has been considered a valid and reliable index of locomotor activity in rodents, the simple measures traditionally recorded in this test do not readily allow for differentiation between compounds of the same general class, e.g. psychostimulants. The present methodology was developed to facilitate detailed and continuous observations on the behaviour of drug-treated rats. In addition to an automated (photocell) measure of general locomotor activity, ethological techniques were used to record the frequency and duration of standing, moving, sniffing, rearing, grooming, scratching, sniffing air, freezing, head-swinging and licking. A series of factor analyses was also performed in order to further characterize treatment-induced changes in the structure of behaviour. Compounds studied were d-amphetamine (0.5, 1.5, 3, 6 mg/kg), cocaine (5, 10, 20, 50 mg/kg) and caffeine (5, 10, 20, 40 mg/kg). Although all three psychostimulants increased the automated measure of general locomotor activity, cocaine (which produced the largest effects) monotonically increased general activity over the dose range tested, whereas the stimulant effects of the other two compounds were either reduced (d-amphetamine) or eliminated (caffeine) at higher doses. More detailed observations provided confirmation of the differences in effect produced by these compounds. For example, the frequency and duration of 'moving' dose-dependently increased after cocaine, while d-amphetamine a…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0149-7634(98)00020-7

Cites

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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Antoniou, K., Kafetzopoulos, E., Papadopoulou-Daifoti, Z., Hyphantis, T., & Marselos, M.
Affiliations
University of Ioannina (GR)
Corresponding author
Antoniou, K
Venue
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1998-12
Volume
23
Issue
2
Pages
189-196
ISSN
0149-7634 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2023971815
Cited by
127
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 12
FWCI
0.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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 › Pharmacology › Coffee research and impacts
Keywords
d-amphetamine, cocaine, caffeine, psychostimulants, locomotor activity, behavioral patterns, stereotypy, dose-response relationship, behavioral pharmacology, open field behavior, ethological observation
MeSH terms
Central Nervous System Stimulants, Animals, Behavior, Animal, Caffeine, Cocaine, Dextroamphetamine, Grooming, Male, Motor Activity, Posture, Rats, Wistar, Dopamine Uptake Inhibitors, Head Movements, 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