title: Age differences in ethanol discrimination: acquisition and ethanol dose generalization curves following multiple training conditions in adolescent and adult rats.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Adolescents and adults vary in sensitivity to many effects of ethanol (EtOH), although it is unknown whether they also differ in their perception of EtOH's subjective cues. This study characterized EtOH discrimination in adolescent and adult male rats using a rapidly acquired Pavlovian conditioned approach procedure.
  
  
  METHODS
  EtOH at 1 of the 3 training doses (0.75, 1.0, or 1.25 g/kg) served as either a positive (POS) or negative (NOS) occasion setter. Each 20-minute training session consisted of eight 15-second presentations of 2 cue lights located on either side of a dipper delivering chocolate Boost(®) . For POS-trained rats, the cue lights reliably predicted 5-second presentations of chocolate Boost during EtOH but not saline sessions, with the opposite contingencies used for NOS-trained rats. Anticipatory approach behavior (head entries into the reward delivery area) in the presence and absence of the cue lights was used to calculate discrimination scores on EtOH and saline sessions. Following acquisition, various doses of EtOH (0 to 1.5 g/kg) were administered to establish generalization curves.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Although animals of both ages responded differentially on EtOH and saline sessions by the end of acquisition, adults met criterion more quickly and had higher discrimination scores during reinforced sessions than adolescents. Whereas adolescents failed to demonstrate any dose-dependent responding during testing when trained with the 0.75 or 1.25 g/kg EtOH doses, adults demonstrated broader EtOH generalization during testing sessions following training with all 3 EtOH doses. Among adolescents trained with 1.0 g/kg EtOH, less generalization occurred relative to adults.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Adolescents were less sensitive to EtOH's interoceptive effects, indicating that EtOH is likely a more salient cue for adults than for adolescents. These findings contribute to evidence that suggests adolescent-typical insensitivity to internal cues that typically limit EtOH consumption may contribute to the elevated intake commonly reported during this developmental period.
authors: Department of Psychology, Binghamton University, Binghamton, New York.
authors: Rachel I
authors: RI
authors: Anderson
authors: Linda P
authors: LP
authors: Spear
mesh_terms: D000375:Aging / Q000187:drug effects / Q000502:physiology*; D000428:Alcohol Drinking / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000523:psychology*; D000818:Animals; D003216:Conditioning, Operant / Q000187:drug effects* / Q000502:physiology; D004193:Discrimination Learning / Q000187:drug effects* / Q000502:physiology; D004305:Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; D000431:Ethanol / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D008297:Male; D011897:Random Allocation; D051381:Rats; D017207:Rats, Sprague-Dawley
chemical_list: D000431:Ethanol
keywords: Adolescent; Discrimination; Ethanol; Pavlovian Conditioned Approach; Rat
references: Dev Psychobiol. 2012 Jul;54(5):523-35
references: 21953609
references: Behav Brain Res. 2011 Nov 20;225(1):358-62
references: 21782854
references: Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2005 Oct;29(10):1796-808
references: 16269909
references: Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2002 Oct;26(10):1502-11
references: 12394283
references: Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2012 Apr;220(4):809-22
references: 22016195
references: Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2007 Jul;31(7):1159-68
references: 17511750
references: Alcohol. 1992 Mar-Apr;9(2):117-22
references: 1599622
references: Behav Neurosci. 2011 Feb;125(1):93-105
references: 21319891
references: Alcohol. 1985 Mar-Apr;2(2):197-201
references: 4015843
references: Alcohol. 2012 Dec;46(8):747-55
references: 22944614
references: Alcohol. 1999 Jan;17(1):63-80
references: 9895039
references: Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2010 Dec;34(12):2106-15
references: 20860618
references: Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2010 Dec;34(12):2061-9
references: 20860614
references: Dev Psychobiol. 1997 Mar;30(2):141-50
references: 9068968
references: Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 1998 May;22(3):670-6
references: 9622449
references: Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2000 Jun;24(4):417-63
references: 10817843
references: Neurotoxicol Teratol. 1992 May-Jun;14(3):221-8
references: 1635542
references: Addict Biol. 2009 Apr;14(2):165-73
references: 19076926
references: Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2006 Feb;30(2):203-13
references: 16441269
references: Neuropsychopharmacology. 2005 Apr;30(4):731-41
references: 15592350
references: Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2003 Jan-Mar;27(1-2):19-31
references: 12732220
references: Biol Res Nurs. 2004 Oct;6(2):151-7
references: 15388912
references: Behav Neurosci. 1998 Oct;112(5):1152-66
references: 9829793
references: Behav Pharmacol. 2007 Dec;18(8):755-65
references: 17989513
references: Behav Brain Res. 2008 Apr 9;188(2):398-405
references: 18242726
references: Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 1998 Apr;22(2):416-21
references: 9581648
references: Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2002 Oct;73(3):673-7
references: 12151043
references: Behav Pharmacol. 2004 May;15(3):183-94
references: 15187576
references: Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2004 Jun;1021:27-32
references: 15251871
references: Behav Pharmacol. 2004 Dec;15(8):569-75
references: 15577455