| First Author | Baskfield CY | Year | 2004 |
| Journal | J Pharmacol Exp Ther | Volume | 309 |
| Issue | 1 | Pages | 86-91 |
| PubMed ID | 14718593 | Mgi Jnum | J:97278 |
| Mgi Id | MGI:3575074 | Doi | 10.1124/jpet.103.055376 |
| Citation | Baskfield CY, et al. (2004) Differential effects of delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol and methanandamide in CB1 knockout and wild-type mice. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 309(1):86-91 |
| abstractText | Mice devoid of CB1 cannabinoid receptors (CB1-/- mice) provide a unique opportunity to further investigate the role of CB1 receptors in exocannabinoid and endocannabinoid effects. CB1-/- mice (N = 18) and their wild-type littermates (CB1+/+ mice; N = 12) were placed in standard mouse operant chambers and trained to lever press under a fixed ratio 10 schedule of reinforcement. When stable lever press responding under the fixed ratio 10 schedule had been established, cannabinoids and noncannabinoids were administered to both groups. CB1+/+ mice acquired the lever press response more readily than CB1-/- mice. Delta(9)-Tetrahydrocannabinol (Delta(9)-THC) decreased lever press responding in CB1+/+ mice only, whereas methanandamide, a metabolically stable endocannabinoid analog, produced similar response rate decreases in both genotypic groups. Similar to Delta(9)-THC, another endocannabinoid analog, (R)-(20-cyano-16,16-dimethyl docosa-cis-5,8,11,14-tetraeno)-1'-hydroxy-2'-propylamine (O-1812), decreased responding in CB1+/+ mice, but not in CB1-/- mice. The CB1 receptor antagonist N-(piperidin-1-yl)-5-(4-chlorophenyl)-1-(2,4-dichlorophenyl-4-methyl-1H-py razole-3-carboxamide hydrochloride (SR141716A) blocked the effects of Delta(9)-THC, but not those of methanandamide. Because methanandamide binds poorly to CB2 receptors, these results suggest possible non-CB1, non-CB2 mechanisms of action for methanandamide-induced behavioral disruption of lever press responding. Ethanol and morphine elicited greater response decreases in CB1-/- mice than in CB1+/+ mice, suggesting a possible role of CB1 receptors in the rate disruptive effects of these drugs. In contrast, diazepam did not produce between group differences, suggesting that CB1 receptors are not involved in diazepam-induced disruption of lever press responding. |
