RESUMEN
The reorientation away from drugs of abuse and toward social interaction is a highly desirable but as yet elusive goal in the therapy of substance dependence. We could previously show that cocaine preferring Sprague-Dawley rats which engaged in only four 15 min episodes of dyadic social interaction (DSI) did not reacquire and reexpress cocaine conditioned place preference (CPP) after a single cocaine exposure. In the present study, we investigated how strong this preventive effect of DSI is. In corroboration of our previous findings in rats, four 15 min DSI episodes prevented the reacquisition/reexpression of cocaine CPP in mice. However, this effect was only observed if only one cocaine conditioning session (15 min) was used. If mice were counterconditioned with a total of four cocaine sessions, the cocaine CPP reemerged. Interestingly, the opposite also held true: in mice that had acquired/expressed cocaine CPP, one conditioning session with DSI did not prevent the persistence of cocaine CPP, whereas four DSI conditioning sessions reversed CPP for 15 mg/kg intraperitoneal cocaine. Of note, this cocaine dose was a strong reward in C57BL/6J mice, causing CPP in all tested animals. Our findings suggest that both the reversal (reconditioning) of CPP from cocaine to DSI as well as that from DSI to cocaine requires four conditioning sessions. As previously shown in C57BL/6 mice from the NIH substrain, mice from the Jackson substrain also showed a greater relative preference for 15 mg/kg intraperitoneal cocaine over DSI, whereas Sprague-Dawley rats were equally attracted to contextual stimuli associated with this cocaine dose and DSI. Also in corroboration of previous findings, both C57BL/6J mice and experimenters several generations removed from the original ones produced CPP for DSI to a lesser degree than Sprague-Dawley rats. Our findings demonstrate the robustness of our experimental model across several subject- and experimenter generations in two rodent genus (i.e., mouse and rat) and allow the quantification of the strength (i.e., persistence) of the preventive effect of DSI against the reacquisition/reexpression of cocaine CPP, arguably a model for cocaine relapse.
RESUMEN
Impaired social interaction is a hallmark symptom of many psychiatric diseases, including dependence syndromes (substance use disorders). Helping the addict reorient her/his behavior away from the drug of abuse toward social interaction would be of considerable therapeutic benefit. To study the neural basis of such a reorientation, we have developed several animal models in which the attractiveness of a dyadic (i.e. one-to-one) social interaction (DSI) can be compared directly with that of cocaine as a prototypical drug of abuse. Our models are based on the conditioned place preference (CPP) paradigm. In an ongoing effort to validate our experimental paradigms in C57BL/6 mice to make use of the plethora of transgenic models available in this genus, we found the following: (a) DSI with a live mouse produced CPP, whereas an interaction with an inanimate mouse-like object (i.e. a 'toy mouse'; toy mouse interaction) led to conditioned place aversion - but only in the Jackson substrain (C57BL/6J). (b) In the NIH substrain (C57BL/6N), both DSI and toy mouse interaction produced individual aversion in more than 50% of the tested mice. (c) Four 15 min DSI episodes did not result in the development of an observable hierarchy, that is, dominance/subordination behavior in the overwhelming majority (i.e. 30 of 32) of the tested Jackson mouse pairs. Therefore, dominance/subordination does not seem to be a confounding variable in our paradigm, at least not in C57BL/6J mice. Respective data for NIH mice were too limited to allow any conclusion. The present findings indicate that (a) DSI with a live mouse produces CPP to a greater degree than an interaction with an inanimate object resembling a mouse and that (b) certain substrain differences with respect to CPP/aversion to DSI do exist between the Jax and NIH substrain of C57BL/6 mice. These differences have to be considered when choosing a proper mouse substrain model for investigating the neural basis of DSI reward versus drug reward.
