@article {46621, title = {Genetic aspects of behavioral neurotoxicology.}, journal = {Neurotoxicology}, volume = {30}, year = {2009}, month = {2009 Sep}, pages = {741-53}, abstract = {

Considerable progress has been made over the past couple of decades concerning the molecular bases of neurobehavioral function and dysfunction. The field of neurobehavioral genetics is becoming mature. Genetic factors contributing to neurologic diseases such as Alzheimer{\textquoteright}s disease have been found and evidence for genetic factors contributing to other diseases such as schizophrenia and autism are likely. This genetic approach can also benefit the field of behavioral neurotoxicology. It is clear that there is substantial heterogeneity of response with behavioral impairments resulting from neurotoxicants. Many factors contribute to differential sensitivity, but it is likely that genetic variability plays a prominent role. Important discoveries concerning genetics and behavioral neurotoxicity are being made on a broad front from work with invertebrate and piscine mutant models to classic mouse knockout models and human epidemiologic studies of polymorphisms. Discovering genetic factors of susceptibility to neurobehavioral toxicity not only helps identify those at special risk, it also advances our understanding of the mechanisms by which toxicants impair neurobehavioral function in the larger population. This symposium organized by Edward Levin and Annette Kirshner, brought together researchers from the laboratories of Michael Aschner, Douglas Ruden, Ulrike Heberlein, Edward Levin and Kathleen Welsh-Bohmer conducting studies with Caenorhabditis elegans, Drosophila, fish, rodents and humans studies to determine the role of genetic factors in susceptibility to behavioral impairment from neurotoxic exposure.

}, keywords = {Animals, Behavior, Disease Models, Animal, Genetics, Humans, Neurotoxicity Syndromes, Neurotoxins, Phylogeny, Toxicology}, issn = {1872-9711}, doi = {10.1016/j.neuro.2009.07.014}, author = {Levin, Edward D and Aschner, Michael and Heberlein, Ulrike and Ruden, Douglas and Welsh-Bohmer, Kathleen A and Bartlett, Selena and Berger, Karen and Chen, Lang and Corl, Ammon B and Eddins, Donnie and French, Rachael and Hayden, Kathleen M and Helmcke, Kirsten and Hirsch, Helmut V B and Linney, Elwood and Lnenicka, Greg and Page, Grier P and Possidente, Debra and Possidente, Bernard and Kirshner, Annette} } @article {46630, title = {Guidelines on nicotine dose selection for in vivo research.}, journal = {Psychopharmacology (Berl)}, volume = {190}, year = {2007}, month = {2007 Feb}, pages = {269-319}, abstract = {

RATIONALE: This review provides insight for the judicious selection of nicotine dose ranges and routes of administration for in vivo studies. The literature is replete with reports in which a dosaging regimen chosen for a specific nicotine-mediated response was suboptimal for the species used. In many cases, such discrepancies could be attributed to the complex variables comprising species-specific in vivo responses to acute or chronic nicotine exposure.

OBJECTIVES: This review capitalizes on the authors{\textquoteright} collective decades of in vivo nicotine experimentation to clarify the issues and to identify the variables to be considered in choosing a dosaging regimen. Nicotine dose ranges tolerated by humans and their animal models provide guidelines for experiments intended to extrapolate to human tobacco exposure through cigarette smoking or nicotine replacement therapies. Just as important are the nicotine dosaging regimens used to provide a mechanistic framework for acquisition of drug-taking behavior, dependence, tolerance, or withdrawal in animal models.

RESULTS: Seven species are addressed: humans, nonhuman primates, rats, mice, Drosophila, Caenorhabditis elegans, and zebrafish. After an overview on nicotine metabolism, each section focuses on an individual species, addressing issues related to genetic background, age, acute vs chronic exposure, route of administration, and behavioral responses.

CONCLUSIONS: The selected examples of successful dosaging ranges are provided, while emphasizing the necessity of empirically determined dose-response relationships based on the precise parameters and conditions inherent to a specific hypothesis. This review provides a new, experimentally based compilation of species-specific dose selection for studies on the in vivo effects of nicotine.

}, keywords = {Animals, Behavioral Research, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Ganglionic Stimulants, Guidelines as Topic, Humans, Models, Biological, Nicotine, Species Specificity}, issn = {0033-3158}, doi = {10.1007/s00213-006-0441-0}, author = {Matta, Shannon G and Balfour, David J and Benowitz, Neal L and Boyd, R Thomas and Buccafusco, Jerry J and Caggiula, Anthony R and Craig, Caroline R and Collins, Allan C and Damaj, M Imad and Donny, Eric C and Gardiner, Phillip S and Grady, Sharon R and Heberlein, Ulrike and Leonard, Sherry S and Levin, Edward D and Lukas, Ronald J and Markou, Athina and Marks, Michael J and McCallum, Sarah E and Parameswaran, Neeraja and Perkins, Kenneth A and Picciotto, Marina R and Quik, Maryka and Rose, Jed E and Rothenfluh, Adrian and Schafer, William R and Stolerman, Ian P and Tyndale, Rachel F and Wehner, Jeanne M and Zirger, Jeffrey M} }