Cited by 45Prenatal Substance Exposure EffectsNicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors StudySmoking Behavior and Cessation

Neurobehavioural defects in adult mice neonatally exposed to nicotine: changes in nicotine-induced behaviour and maze learning performance

Ankarberg, Emma, Fredriksson, Anders, Eriksson, Per·2001·Behavioural Brain Research

Abstract

Neonatal exposure to low doses of nicotine has been shown to disturb the development of low-affinity nicotinic binding sites in the cerebral cortex and to elicit a deviant behavioural response to nicotine in adult mice. In this study, 10-day-old male NMRI mice were exposed to one of three different doses of nicotine (3.3, 33, or 66 microg nicotine-base/kg body wt.) s.c. twice daily on 5 consecutive days to study dose-response effects of nicotine on adult spontaneous and nicotine-induced motor behaviour. The nicotine-induced behaviour test revealed a hypoactive response to nicotine in 4-month-old mice neonatally exposed to 33 or 66 microg nicotine-base, whereas the response to nicotine in control animals and mice exposed to 3.3 microg nicotine-base was an increased activity. Learning and memory functions were also investigated in adult animals neonatally exposed to 66 microg nicotine-base/kg body wt. in the same manner, in the Morris water maze and in the Radial arm maze. In the swim maze and the Radial arm maze tests, no significant differences were observed between nicotine-treated and control animals at the age of 4 months. At 7 months, however, a significant difference in performance was evident, indicating a time-response/time-dependent effect. Furthermore, it was shown that in mice exposed neonatally to a nicotine dose known to inhibit the development of the nicotinic low affinity-binding site (LA), the response to nicotine could not cause any increase in spontaneous motor activity as seen in controls.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0166-4328(01)00207-8

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ankarberg, E., Fredriksson, A., & Eriksson, P.
Affiliations
Uppsala University (SE)
Corresponding author
Ankarberg, Emma
Venue
Behavioural Brain Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2001-09
Volume
123
Issue
2
Pages
185-192
ISSN
0166-4328 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2004267080
Cited by
45
References
25
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Behavioural Brain Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Substance Exposure Effects
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors Study
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
Keywords
spontaneous motor activity, learning and memory, Morris water maze, radial maze, dose-response relationship, time-dependent effects, neurobehavioral deficits, adult mice
MeSH terms
Age Factors, Animals, Animals, Newborn, Arousal, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Escape Reaction, Male, Mice, Inbred Strains, Motor Activity, Nicotine, Problem Solving, Mental Recall, Receptors, Nicotinic, Maze Learning, 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