Cited by 150Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors StudyNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

Enhancement of Attentional Performance by Selective Stimulation of α4β2* nAChRs: Underlying Cholinergic Mechanisms

Open access
Howe, William M, Ji, Jinzhao, Parikh, Vinay, Williams, Sarah, Mocaër, Elisabeth, Trocmé-Thibierge, Caryn, Sarter, Martin·2010·Neuropsychopharmacology

Abstract

Impairments in attention are a major component of the cognitive symptoms of neuropsychiatric and neurodegenerative disorders. Using an operant sustained attention task (SAT), including a distractor condition (dSAT), we assessed the putative pro-attentional effects of the selective alpha4beta2(*) nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) agonist S 38232 in comparison with the non-selective agonist nicotine. Neither drug benefited SAT performance. However, in interaction with the increased task demands implemented by distractor presentation, the selective agonist, but not nicotine, enhanced the detection of signals during the post-distractor recovery period. This effect is consistent with the hypothesis that second-long increases in cholinergic activity ('transients') mediate the detection of cues and that nAChR agonists augment such transients. Electrochemical recordings of prefrontal cholinergic transients evoked by S 38232 and nicotine indicated that the alpha4beta2(*) nAChR agonist evoked cholinergic transients that were characterized by a faster rise time and more rapid decay than those evoked by nicotine. Blockade of the alpha7 nAChR 'sharpens' nicotine-evoked transients; therefore, we determined the effects of co-administration of nicotine and the alpha7 nAChR antagonist methyllycaconitine on dSAT performance. Compared with vehicle and nicotine alone, this combined treatment significantly enhanced the detection of signals. These results indicate that compared with nicotine, alpha4beta2(*) nAChR agonists significantly enhance attentional performance and that the dSAT represents a useful behavioral screening tool. The combined behavioral and electrochemical evidence supports the hypothesis that nAChR agonist-evoked cholinergic transients, which are characterized by rapid rise time and fast decay, predict robust drug-induced enhancement of attentional performance.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/npp.2010.9

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Stimulation of α4β2 nicotinic receptors in the medial prefrontal cortex enhances performance in a visual attention task.

    “stimulation of α4β2 nicotinic receptors in the medial prefrontal cortex enhances performance in a visual attention task (Howe et al., 2010)”
  • Some essential features of this circuitry have been validated in terms of predicting the effects of cholinergic drugs on attentional performance.

    “Importantly, some essential features of this circuitry have been validated in terms of predicting the effects of cholinergic drugs on attentional performance (Howe et al, 2010).”

    From Modes and models of forebrain cholinergic neuromodulation of cognition (2011) · cites this paper as Howe et al, 2010

  • Cholinergic stimulation of α4β2* nAChRs evokes cholinergic transients via stimulating glutamate release, and the mediodorsal input is required to generate such transients.

    “Furthermore, cholinergic stimulation of α4β2* nAChRs evoked cholinergic transients via stimulating glutamate release, and the mediodorsal input is required to generate such transients.”

    From Modes and models of forebrain cholinergic neuromodulation of cognition (2011) · cites this paper as Howe et al, 2010

  • The decay rate of cholinergic transients is not controlled by glutamatergic-cholinergic interactions.

    “In contrast to the amplitude of cholinergic transients, the decay rate of such transients, that is, the duration and rate of decrease of ACh release is not controlled by these glutamatergic-cholinergic interactions (Parikh et al, 2008, 2010; Howe et al, 2010).”

    From Modes and models of forebrain cholinergic neuromodulation of cognition (2011) · cites this paper as Howe et al, 2010

  • The amplitude of cholinergic transients is determined by glutamatergic stimulation of ionotropic glutamate receptors.

    “Evidence from neuropharmacological studies using selective nAChR ligands and antagonists at ionotropic glutamate receptors, and assessing the effects of infusions of these compounds into the PFC of animals lacking α4β2* or α7 nAChRs, or animals with lesions of the MD, collectively indicated that the amplitude of cholinergic transients is determined by glutamatergic stimulation of ionotropic”

    From Modes and models of forebrain cholinergic neuromodulation of cognition (2011) · cites this paper as Howe et al, 2010

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Howe, W. M., Ji, J., Parikh, V., Williams, S., Mocaër, E., Trocmé-Thibierge, C., & Sarter, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Temple University (US)
  • Servier (France) (FR)
Corresponding author
Sarter, Martin
Venue
Neuropsychopharmacology
Published
2010-02-10
Volume
35
Issue
6
Pages
1391-1401
ISSN
  • 0893-133X (ISSN-L)
  • 1740-634X
OpenAlex
W2085190125
Cited by
150
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 22
FWCI
9.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuropsychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Servier
  • Institut de Recherches Servier
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH080332, R21MH080426, MH080426, MH 080332)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (T32DA007267)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors Study
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Keywords
attention, nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, nicotine, alpha7 nAChR, methyllycaconitine, sustained attention, distractor task, prefrontal cortex, electrochemical recording, attentional enhancement
MeSH terms
Acetylcholine, Animals, Attention, Brain, Brain Chemistry, Cognition, Cues, Drug Interactions, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Nicotine, Psychomotor Performance, Receptors, Nicotinic, Rats, Wistar, Prefrontal Cortex, Nicotinic Agonists, Nicotinic Antagonists, Excitatory Postsynaptic Potentials, Rats, Electrochemical Techniques, Executive Function, alpha7 Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptor

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