Abstract
Genetic studies suggest that dopamine D4 receptor polymorphism is associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). We recently reported that motor hyperactivity in juvenile male rats with neonatal 6-hydroxydopamine lesions of the central dopamine system can be reversed by dopamine D4 receptor-selective antagonists. In this study, effects of such lesions on D4 as well as other dopamine receptors (D1 and D2) were autoradiographically quantified at selected developmental stages. Neonatal lesions resulted in motor hyperactivity at postnatal day (PD) 25, but not at PD 37 or 60. Correspondingly, D4 receptor levels in lesioned rats were substantially increased in caudate-putamen and decreased in nucleus accumbens at PD 25, but not at PD 37 or 60. Neonatal lesions also led to relatively minor changes in D1 and D2 receptor binding in various forebrain regions. However, the time-course of lesion-induced motor hyperactivity correlated only with changes in D4, but not D1 and D2 receptors. These results further support the hypothesis that D4 receptors may play a pivotal role in lesion-induced hyperactivity, and possibly in clinical ADHD.
Similar content being viewed by others
Main
Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neuropsychiatric condition characterized by hyperactivity, inattention and impulsivity, typically in school-aged boys (Barkley 1990). Abnormal dopamine (DA) neurotransmission has long been considered to underlie the disorder since most symptoms of ADHD can be alleviated by psychostimulant drugs, notably methylphenidate and amphetamines, that release DA among other actions. Increased radioligand binding to dopamine transporters (DAT) in patients with ADHD identified in recent brain imaging studies further implicates deficient DA functioning in the disorder (Dougherty et al. 1999; Dresel et al. 2000).
DA modulates physiological processes through activation of five G-protein coupled receptors classified into D1-like (D1 and D5) and D2-like (D2, D3, and D4) families (Neve and Neve 1997). Among these, the D4 receptors, uniquely, have been implicated in clinical ADHD by genetic linkage studies (La Hoste et al. 1996). Human D4 receptors occur in multiple forms with 2–11 copies of a 16-amino acid sequence in the putative third intracellular loop of the peptide (Van Tol et al. 1992; Lichter et al. 1993; Asghari et al. 1994). One such allele is the D4.7 receptor, containing seven repeats of this sequence. It has repeatedly been associated with ADHD, as well as related behavioral traits such as novelty-seeking and impulsivity (Benjamin et al. 1996; Ebstein et al. 1996; La Hoste et al. 1996; Bailey et al. 1997; Rowe et al. 1998; Swanson et al. 1998; Faraone et al. 1999; Barr et al. 2000).
Some features of ADHD are simulated in several laboratory models, including: (1) rats with neonatal lesions of the central DA system induced by the neurotoxin 6-hydroxydopamine (6-OHDA; Shaywitz et al. 1976); (2) the spontaneously hypertensive Kyoto-Wistar rat (Tucker and Johnson 1981); (3) nonhuman primates treated with the DA neurotoxin N-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine (MPTP; Roeltgen and Schneider 1991); and (4) genetic knock-out mice lacking functional DAT (Giros et al. 1996). Juvenile male rats with neonatal 6-OHDA lesions are a particularly appropriate model for the hyperactivity of ADHD in that lesion-induced motor hyperactivity is most prominent at an age corresponding to human periadolescence (Shaywitz et al. 1976; Erinoff et al. 1979), and is dose-dependently antagonized by stimulants used to treat clinical ADHD (Heffner and Seiden 1982). In addition, the model is associated with learning deficits that are also antagonized by stimulants (Takasuna and Iwasaki 1996; Wool et al. 1987).
We found recently that motor hyperactivity following 6-OHDA lesioning of neonatal rats can be reversed dose-dependently by selective antagonists for D4 but not D2 receptors, and exacerbated by a D4 agonist (Zhang et al. 2001b). In addition, motor hyperactivity correlated closely with the magnitude of increased D4, but not D2 receptor binding in basal forebrain. The present study further investigated the role of D4 receptors in motor hyperactivity by studying temporal relationships between lesion effects on developmental expression of D4 receptors and lesion-induced motor hyperactivity. In a pilot experiment, we found that lesion-induced motor hyperactivity reached peak levels at postnatal day (PD) 25, and disappeared by PD 35. Consequently, PD 25, 37 and 60 were chosen to represent three critical developmental stages: juvenile rats with motor hyperactivity (PD 25), juvenile rats lacking hyperactivity (PD 37), and rats in early adulthood (PD 60). We hypothesize that upregulation of D4 receptors in lesioned rats occurs selectively during the periadolescent period when hyperactivity is present, but normalizes with further maturation as motor activity of lesioned rats returns to control level.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Radioligands and Chemicals
[3H]Nemonapride (R[+]-7-chloro-8-hydroxy-3-methyl-1-phenyl-2,3,4,5-tetrahydro-1H-3-benzazepine; 85.5 Ci/mmol) and [3H]SCH-23390 (R[+]-2,3,4,5-tetrahydro-3-methyl-5-phenyl-1H-3-benzazepin-7-ol; 81.4 Ci/mmol) were from New England Nuclear (NEN; Boston, MA). [3H]β-CIT ([−]-2-β-carbomethoxy-3-β-[4-iodophenyl]-tropane; 64.7 Ci/mmol) was from Tocris-Cookson (Bristol, UK). Tritium-sensitive Hyperfilm, D-19 developer and fixative were from Eastman-Kodak (Rochester, NY). 1,3-Ditolylguanidine (DTG), cis-flupenthixol dihydrochloride, desipramine hydrochloride, 6-OHDA hydrobromide, ketanserin tartrate, S(−)-pindolol, S(−)-raclopride tartrate, and S(−)-sulpiride were from Sigma-RBI (Natick, MA). Other chemicals were from Fisher Scientific (Dallas, TX) or Sigma Chemicals (St. Louis, MO).
Neonatal Lesioning
Uses of animals were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) of McLean Hospital, in compliance with applicable federal and local guidelines for ethical use of experimental animals. Sprague-Dawley rats (Charles River Labs; Wilmington, MA) were maintained under a 12/12-h artificial daylight/dark schedule (on at 7 A.M.), with free access to tap-water and standard rat chow. On PD 1, male pups were randomly assigned to lactating dams (10/dam). On PD 5, pups received a subcutaneous (s.c.) injection of desipramine hydrochloride (25 mg/kg), followed by randomized intracisternal (i.c.) injections of either 6-OHDA hydrobromide (equivalent to 100 μg free base) or vehicle (320 mM NaCl containing 0.1% ascorbic acid) under hypothermal anesthesia 60 min later (Shaywitz et al. 1976; Zhang et al. 2001b). Pups were returned to nursing dams after regaining consciousness. The extent of lesioning was verified by quantifying DAT binding autoradiographically with [3H]β-CIT as a specific indicator of DA nerve terminals at the completion of behavioral experiments (Kula et al. 1999; Zhang et al. 2001b).
Behavioral Experiments
Motor activity was quantified with an infrared photobeam activity monitoring system (San Diego Instruments; San Diego, CA) controlled by a microcomputer, as detailed previously (Zhang et al. 2001b). Individual rats were tested in a novel environment in the absence of food and water (17 × 8 × 8 inch transparent plastic cages in a 4 × 8 horizontal grid of infrared beams), between 10:00 and 16:00 h on PD 24, 36, or 59. Scores were collected at 5-min intervals for 2.5 h. Locomotor activity was defined as breaking of consecutive photobeams.
DA Transporter and Receptor Autoradiography
Rats were sacrificed by rapid decapitation one day after behavioral testing. Brains were quickly removed and frozen in prechilled isopentane. Coronal sections (10 μm) were prepared in a cryostat at −17°C, thaw-mounted on gelatin-coated microscopic slides, and stored at −80°C until used in quantitative autoradiographic assays. For each assay, data from three contiguous brain sections were pooled to yield an average result for each of 9–11 subjects/experimental group.
For DAT binding assays, tissue sections were preincubated for 60 min at room temp. in 50 mM Tris-citrate buffer (pH 7.4) containing (mM): NaCl (120), and MgCl2 (4). Sections were then incubated for another 60 min in fresh buffer containing 2 nM [3H]β-CIT. Specific binding was defined with excess GBR-12909 (1 μM). Sections were then washed twice (5 min in ice-cold buffer), rinsed in deionized water, and air-dried.
All DA receptor binding assays were carried out at room temp. in 50 mM Tris-HCl buffer (pH 7.4) containing (mM): NaCl (120), KCl (5), CaCl2 (2), and MgCl2 (1). After preincubation for 60 min, brain sections were transferred to fresh buffer containing radioligand of specified concentration, and incubated for 60 min. Sections were then washed twice (5 min in ice-cold buffer), rinsed in deionized water, and air-dried.
D1-like receptor binding was determined with 1 nM [3H]SCH-23390 (Tarazi et al. 1998a; Zhang et al. 2001b). 5-HT2A/2C binding sites were masked with 100 nM ketanserin. Nonspecific binding was determined with 1 μM cis-flupenthixol. Although [3H]SCH-23390 binds to both D1 and D5 receptors under these assay conditions, expression of D5 receptors in rat forebrain is very limited (Meador-Woodruff et al. 1992), and the majority of the binding in brain regions examined represents D1 receptors.
D2-like receptor binding was assayed with 1 nM [3H]nemonapride, with 0.5 μM DTG and 0.1 μM pindolol included to block σ and 5-HT1A binding sites, respectively (Tarazi et al. 1998a; Zhang et al. 2001b). Nonspecific binding was determined with 10 μM S(−)-sulpiride. Although the signal includes binding to D2, D3, and D4 sites, most of the binding represents D2 sites.
D4 receptor binding was assayed using 1 nM [3H]nemonapride, with 300 nM of the D2/D3-selective antagonist raclopride to fully occlude D2 and D3 sites, as well as 0.5 μM DTG and 0.1 μM pindolol to block σ and 5-HT1A binding sites (Tarazi et al. 1998a; Zhang et al. 2001b). Nonspecific binding was determined with 10 μM S(−)-sulpiride.
Dried sections were exposed to tritium-sensitive Kodak Hyperfilm for 2–6 weeks before standard photographic processing (Tarazi et al. 1998a; Zhang et al. 2001b). Radioligand binding was quantified with a computerized image analyzer (Image Research Inc.; St. Catherines, Ontario), and converted to nCi/mg tissue using [3H]reference standards, with specific binding expressed as mean ± S.E.M. in fmol/mg tissue. Radioligand density was quantified in caudate-putamen (CPu), nucleus accumbens septi (NAc), and medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) as outlined in Figure 1 .
Data Analysis
Lesion effects on DA transporter and receptor density were analyzed by two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for overall effects of treatment in various brain regions, followed by post-hoc Dunnett's t-tests for planned comparisons. Two-tailed probability (p) of < .05 indicated statistically significant differences. Behavioral data were analyzed using Mann-Whitney nonparametric analysis.
RESULTS
Motor Activity
Neonatal 6-OHDA lesions resulted in robust spontaneous hyperactivity at PD 24 ( Figure 2 ). Activity of lesioned rats was not different from that of sham controls for the first 10 min of testing, but declined much more slowly than in controls thereafter. At PD 36 and 59, neither total locomotor activity nor its distribution within 2.5 h of testing differed significantly between lesioned rats and sham controls.
DA Transporters
Neonatal 6-OHDA lesions resulted in large reductions in DAT binding in CPu and NAc (Figure 3 ). At PD 25, average losses of DAT binding were 80.1% in CPu and 65.7% in NAc. With further maturation, loss of DAT binding in CPu (71.2% and 70.4% at PD 37 and 60, respectively) was not statistically different from that of PD 25, whereas DAT binding in NAc recovered substantially (37.5% and 28.6% loss at PD 37 and 60; F2,18 df = 15.1, p < .01).
D1 Receptors
In sham-control rats, there were moderate and statistically significant maturational losses of D1 receptor binding between PD 25 and 60 across all brain regions evaluated (F2,18 df = 4.28, p < .05; Table 1) . Neonatal 6-OHDA lesions resulted in a small decrease in D1 receptor binding in CPu at PD 60 (by 8.8%; p < .05), but not at PD 25 or 37. D1 receptor binding in NAc was unaffected by the lesions at any age. In mPFC, the lesions led to a significant increase of D1 receptor binding at PD 37 (26.2%; p < .05), but not at PD 25 and 60.
D2 Receptors
Across three brain regions examined, there were significant maturational losses of D2 receptor binding in both controls (F2,18 df = 30.3, p < .001) and lesioned rats (F2,18 df = 20.4, p < .01; Table 1). Neonatal 6-OHDA lesions increased D2 receptor binding in CPu by 20.6%, 13.2%, and 14.9% at PD 25, 37 and 60, respectively, whereas D2 receptor binding in NAc and mPFC was not affected.
D4 Receptors
D4 receptor binding decreased significantly with maturation in all brain regions in control rats (F2,18 df = 52.2; p < .001; Figure 4 ). At PD 25, neonatal 6-OHDA lesions resulted in significantly increased D4 receptor binding in CPu (by 33.3%; p < .01), and decreased D4 binding in NAc (by 43.6%; p < .05). Differences between lesioned and control rats were not statistically significant at later ages, when motor activity of lesioned rats returned to control levels. D4 receptor binding in mPFC was not affected at any age.
DISCUSSION
In agreement with previous reports (Shaywitz et al. 1976; Heffner and Seiden 1982; Zhang et al. 2001b), neonatal 6-OHDA lesioning of developing DA projections in rat forebrain resulted in robust motor hyperactivity. This behavioral response appears to represent deficient habituation to a novel environment, since motor activity in the initial testing period did not differ appreciably between lesioned rats and sham controls (Figure 2, PD 24). Also in accord with previous studies (Shaywitz et al. 1976; Erinoff et al. 1979), lesion-induced motor hyperactivity was evident only during early development (PD 24 in this study), and no longer present at PD 36 or 59 (Figure 2).
Neonatal 6-OHDA lesions resulted in a substantial and sustained decrease in DAT binding in CPu. In contrast, loss of DAT binding in NAc (66%) at PD 25 was less than that in CPu (80%; p < .05), and recovered substantially at later ages (29% loss at PD 60). Recovery of DAT binding in NAc was temporally paralleled by normalization of motor behavior with maturation. The mesolimbic DA pathway to NAc plays an important role in exploratory behavior (Le Moal and Simon 1991), including in 6-OHDA lesion-induced hyperactivity (Heffner et al. 1983). Therefore, it is possible that post-lesioning plasticity involving DA neurotransmission in NAc may contribute to normalization of motor activity in early adulthood.
Developmental studies on DA innervation to NAc after site-specific injection of 6-OHDA into CPu have yielded contradictory results. Whereas gradual recovery of tyrosine hydroxylase (TH) immunoreactivity has been reported (Frohna et al. 1997), slowly progressive loss of DA content was noted after more complete lesions (Teicher et al. 1998). Recovery of DAT levels in NAc at PD 37 and 60 in the present study (Figure 3) may indicate repair or regrowth of DA projections from ventral tegmental area to NAc. Parallel developmental studies of DA tissue content, extracellular DA concentration, and density of DA terminals after 6-OHDA lesioning of neonates might further clarify adaptive changes in DA innervation to the NAc after varying degree of lesioning.
D1 receptors in neostriatum have been reported, inconsistently, to be unaffected by moderate or severe neonatal 6-OHDA lesions (Dewar et al. 1990; Caboche et al. 1991; Radja et al. 1993; Frohna et al. 1995; Zhang et al. 2001b), or decreased by nearly complete lesions (Gelbard et al. 1989). This inconsistency may reflect differences in the extent or timing of lesioning or sampling. In the present study, we found a small, but statistically significant late decrease in D1 receptor binding in CPu at PD 60, but not PD 25 or 37 (Table 1). The timing of this change does not readily account for motor hyperactivity that was present only at PD 25. We also found a significant increase in D1 receptor binding in mPFC at PD 37 (Table 1). In view of the proposed role of frontal cortex in self-injurious behavior that follows the lesioning, this relatively late increase in D1 expression may contribute to self-injurious behavior induced by D1 agonists that is particularly prominent in rats at such later ages following neonatal 6-OHDA lesions (Breese et al. 1984, 1985; Cromwell et al. 1999).
D2 receptors in neostriatum have been found to be unchanged or slightly increased by neonatal 6-OHDA lesions (Breese et al. 1987; Dewar et al. 1990; Radja et al. 1993; Frohna et al. 1995; Zhang et al. 2001b). We found that such lesions resulted in small increases of D2 receptor binding in CPu at all developmental stages evaluated, regardless of whether motor hyperactivity was present or not (Table 1). A lack of temporal correlation between D2 receptor changes and motor hyperactivity, together with previous pharmacological evidence that D2-selective antagonists do not affect lesion-induced hyperactivity (Heffner and Seiden 1982; Zhang et al. 2001b), suggest that D2 receptors are not critically involved in the hyperactivity.
Consistent with our earlier observation of maturational pruning of D4 receptors at puberty (Tarazi et al. 1998b), D4 receptor binding in CPu, NAc, and mPFC of sham-control rats was highest at PD 25, and decreased significantly with further maturation (Figure 4). After lesioning at PD 25, D4 receptor binding was significantly increased in the CPu, whereas in the NAc, D4 receptor binding was substantially decreased. The extent of these changes (33% increase in CPu and 44% decrease in NAc) was much greater than the observed upregulation of D2 receptors. More importantly, changes in D4 receptors were detected only when lesioned rats exhibited hyperactivity (PD 25), and not with further maturation (PD 37 and 60) when motor activity of lesioned rats had returned to control levels. In contrast to the temporary effects of neonatal 6-OHDA lesions on D4 receptors, effects of such lesions in adult rats follow a different pattern. Selective destruction of nigrostriatal DA projections in adult rats increased D4 receptor binding in CPu at five weeks but not one week after lesioning (Tarazi et al. 1998a; Zhang et al. 2001a), suggesting mechanisms for D4 receptor regulation differ at specific developmental stages.
Previously, we found no differences in D4 receptor binding in NAc between sham-control and lesioned rats using procedures identical to those employed in the present study (Zhang et al. 2001b). These seemingly inconsistent results may reflect antemortem exposure to D4-selective drugs in the previous study. Additional experiments are needed to verify the potential effects of such drug exposure.
To recapitulate, DA receptor subtypes were found to be differentially regulated in response to neonatal 6-OHDA lesions of rat forebrain DA systems. Close examination of these changes in the context of motor hyperactivity revealed that, in addition to plasticity of presynaptic DA terminals in NAc, changes of D4 receptors in CPu or NAc are also likely to be involved in motor hyperactivity in lesioned rats. In view of our previous finding that lesion-induced motor hyperactivity was reversed by D4-selective antagonists, the present results further suggest a pivotal role of D4 receptors.
Mechanisms by which D4 receptor plasticity may contribute to motor hyperactivity remain obscure, particularly due to limited information about the physiological role of these receptors (Tarazi and Baldessarini 1999; Oak et al. 2000). PFC is likely to be a crucial site due to its relative abundance of D4 receptors (Mrzljak et al. 1996; Ariano et al. 1997; Tarazi et al. 1998a; De la Garza II and Madras 2000). Moreover, this brain region is proposed to be critically involved in the pathophysiology of ADHD, based on clinical neuropsychological and functional brain imaging studies (Barkley et al. 1992; Ernst and Zametkin 1995; Barkley 1997). In the present study, we did not find significant changes in D4 receptor binding in mPFC (Figure 4). However, altered coupling of D4 receptors to G-proteins, or other downstream molecular events require further consideration.
D4 receptors are proposed to be present on glutamatergic terminals of corticostriatal projections from mPFC to CPu, based on studies of cortical ablation (Tarazi et al. 1998a). Glutamatergic efferents from mPFC are important in limiting behavioral responses to various stimuli (Bubser and Schmidt 1990; Flores et al. 1996; Wilkinson et al. 1997; Lacroix et al. 1998). Upregulation of D4 receptors in CPu at PD 25 after lesioning (Figure 4), therefore, may contribute to behavioral hyperactivity, indirectly, by enhancing behaviorally inhibitory descending influences of cortex on lower limbic-motor centers.
The seemingly opposite effects of neonatal 6-OHDA lesions on D4 receptors in NAc vs. CPu is particularly intriguing. D4 receptors may reside on glutamatergic terminals in CPu (Tarazi et al. 1998a), but a subset of D4 receptors in NAc has been localized to DA terminals (Svingos et al. 2000). Decreased D4 receptor binding in NAc in 6-OHDA lesioned rats may represent loss of these presynaptic sites, perhaps leading to an increase in DA release from its remaining terminals. However, the precise manner in which adaptive changes in both CPu and NAc contribute to the age-limited expression of behavioral hyperactivity remains to be further clarified. Nonetheless, the striking developmental parallels between the behavioral hyperactivity and changes of D4 expression in CPu and NAc after neonatal lesions suggest their involvement in hyperactivity and behavioral responses of these rats to D4-selective agents.
In conclusion, we found that DA receptor subtypes in rat forebrain were differentially affected by removing DA projections to basal forebrain during early postnatal development. Of the three DA receptors examined, changes in D4 receptors (time-limited increases in CPu, losses in NAc) were much larger than those of D1 or D2 receptors. Moreover, behavioral hyperactivity most closely paralleled the temporal pattern of D4 receptor expression in basal forebrain after the lesions, as D4 receptor changes in both CPu and NAc were maximal at PD 25. These relationships add support to the hypothesis that D4 receptors are involved in motor hyperactivity that follows neonatal lesions of DA neurons with 6-OHDA in rats, and potentially also in clinical ADHD.
References
Ariano MA, Wang J, Noblett KL, Larson ER, Sibley DR . (1997): Cellular distribution of the rat D4 dopamine receptor protein in the CNS using anti-receptor antisera. Brain Res 752: 26–34
Asghari V, Schoots O, Van Kats S, Ohara K, Jovanovic V, Guan H-G, Bunzow JR, Petronis A, Van Tol HHM . (1994): Dopamine D4 receptor repeat: Analysis of different native and mutant forms of the human and rat genes. Mol Pharmacol 46: 364–373
Bailey HN, Palmer CG, Ramsey C, Cantwell D, Kim K, Woodward JA, McGough J, Asarnow RF, Nelson S, Smalley SL . (1997): DRD4 gene and susceptibility to attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Am J Med Genet Neuropsychiat Genet 74: 623–624
Barkley RA . (1990): Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: A Handbook For Diagnosis And Treatment. New York: Guilford Press
Barkley RA . (1997): Behavioral inhibition, sustained attention, and executive functions: Constructing a unifying theory of ADHD. Psychol Bull 121: 65–94
Barkley RA, Grodzinsky G, DuPaul GJ . (1992): Frontal lobe functions in attention deficit disorder with and without hyperactivity: a review and research report. J Abnorm Child Psychol 20: 163–188
Barr CL, Wigg K, Bloom S, Schachar R, Tannock R, Roberts W, Malone M, Vandenbergh DJ, Kennedy JL . (2000): Further evidence from haplotype analysis for linkage to the dopamine D4 receptor gene and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. Am J Med Genetics 96: 262–267
Benjamin J, Li L, Patterson C, Greenberg BD, Murphy DL, Hamer DH . (1996): Population and familial association between D4 dopamine receptor gene and measures of novelty-seeking. Nat Genet 12: 81–84
Breese GR, Baumeister AA, McCown TJ, Emerick SG, Frye GD, Crotty K, Mueller RA . (1984): Behavioral differences between neonatal and adult 6-hydroxydopamine-treated rats to dopamine agonists: relevance to neurological symptoms in clinical syndromes with reduced brain dopamine. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 231: 343–354
Breese GR, Baumeister AA, Napier TC, Frye GD, Mueller RA . (1985): Evidence that D1 dopamine receptors contribute to the supersensitive behavioral responses induced by L-dihydroxy-phenylalanine in rats treated neonatally with 6-hydroxydopamine. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 235: 287–295
Breese GR, Duncan GE, Napier TC, Bondy SC, Iorio LC, Mueller RA . (1987): 6-Hydroxydopamine treatments enhance behavioral responses to intracerebral microinjection of D1 and D2-dopamine agonists into nucleus accumbens and striatum without changing dopamine antagonists binding. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 240: 167–191
Bubser M, Schmidt WJ . (1990): 6-Hydroxydopamine lesion of the rat prefrontal cortex increases locomotor activity, impairs acquisition of delayed alternation tasks, but does not affect uninterrupted tasks in the radial maze. Behav Brain Res 37: 157–168
Caboche J, Rogard M, Besson MJ . (1991): Comparative development of D1-dopamine and μ opiate receptors in normal and in 6-hydroxydopamine-lesioned neonatal rat striatum: Dopaminergic fibers regulate μ but not D1 receptor distribution. Dev Brain Res 58: 111–122
Cromwell HC, Levine MS, King BH . (1999): Cortical damage enhances pemoline-induced self-injurious behavior in prepubertal rats. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 62: 223–227
De la Garza II R, Madras BK . (2000): [3H]PNU-101958, a D4 dopamine receptor probe, accumulates in prefrontal cortex and hippocampus of non-human primate brain. Synapse 37: 232–244
Dewar KM, Soghomonian JJ, Bruno JP, Descarries L, Reader TA . (1990): Elevation of dopamine D2 but not D1 receptors in adult rat striatum after neonatal 6-hydroxydopamine denervation. Brain Res 536: 287–297
Dougherty DD, Bonab AA, Spencer TJ, Rauch SL, Madras BK, Fishman AJ . (1999): Dopamine transporter density in patients with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Lancet 354: 2132–2133
Dresel S, Krause J, Krause KH, La Fougere C, Brinkbaumer K, Kung HF, Hahn K, Tatsch K . (2000): Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: binding of [99mTc]TRODAT-1 to the dopamine transporter before and after methylphenidate treatment. Eur J Nucl Med 27: 1518–1524
Ebstein RP, Novik O, Umansky R, Priel B, Osher Y, Blaine D, Bennett ER, Nemanov L, Katz M, Belmaker RH . (1996): Dopamine D4 receptor (D4DR) exon III polymorphism associated with the human personality trait of novelty seeking. Nat Genet 12: 78–80
Erinoff L, MacPhail RC, Heller A, Seiden LS . (1979): Age-dependent effects of 6-hydroxydopamine on locomotor activity in the rat. Brain Res 164: 195–205
Ernst M, Zametkin A . (1995): The interface of genetics, neuroimaging, and neurochemistry in attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. In Bloom FE, Kupfer DJ (eds), Psychopharmacology: The Fourth Generation Of Progress. New York: Raven Press, pp. 1643–1652
Faraone SV, Biederman J, Weiffenbach B, Keith T, Chu MP, Weaver A, Spencer TJ, Wilens TE, Frazier J, Cleves M, Sakai J . (1999): Dopamine D4 gene 7-repeat allele and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Am J Psychiatry 156: 768–770
Flores G, Wood GK, Liang JJ, Quirion R, Srivastava LK . (1996): Enhanced amphetamine sensitivity and increased dopamine D2 receptors in postpubertal rats after neonatal excitotoxic lesions of the medial prefrontal cortex. J Neurosci 16: 7366–7375
Frohna PA, Neal-Beliveau BS, Joyce JN . (1995): Neonatal 6-hydroxydopamine lesions lead to opposing changes in the levels of dopamine receptors and their messenger RNAs. Neuroscience 68: 505–518
Frohna PA, Neal-Beliveau BS, Joyce JN . (1997): Delayed plasticity of the mesolimbic dopamine system following neonatal 6-OHDA lesions. Synapse 25: 293–305
Gelbard HA, Teicher MH, Baldessarini RJ, Gallitano AL, Marsh ER, Zorc J, Faedda G . (1989): Dopamine D1 receptor development depends on endogenous dopamine. Dev Brain Res 56: 137–140
Giros B, Jaber M, Jones SR, Wightman RM, Caron MG . (1996): Hyperlocomotion and indifference to cocaine and amphetamine in mice lacking the dopamine transporter. Nature 379: 606–612
Heffner TG, Heller A, Miller FE, Kotake C, Seiden LS . (1983): Locomotor hyperactivity in neonatal rats following electrolytic lesions of mesocortical dopamine neurons. Dev Brain Res 9: 29–37
Heffner TG, Seiden LS . (1982): Possible involvement of serotonergic neurons in the reduction of locomotor hyperactivity caused by amphetamine in neonatal rats depleted of brain dopamine. Brain Res 244: 81–90
Kula NS, Baldessarini RJ, Tarazi FI, Fisser R, Wang S, Trometer J, Neumeyer JL . (1999): [3H]β-cit: a radioligand for dopamine transporter in rat brain tissue. Eur J Pharmacol 385: 291–294
La Hoste GJ, Swanson JM, Wigal SB, Glabe C, Wigal T, King N, Kennedy JL . (1996): Dopamine D4 receptor gene polymorphism is associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Mol Psychiatry 1: 128–131
Lacroix L, Broersen LM, Weiner I, Feldon J . (1998): The effects of excitotoxic lesion of the medial prefrontal cortex on latent inhibition, prepulse inhibition, food hoarding, elevated plus maze, activity avoidance and locomotor activity in the rat. Neuroscience 82: 431–442
Le Moal M, Simon H . (1991): Mesocorticolimbic dopaminergic network: functional and regulatory roles. Physiol Rev 71: 155–234
Lichter JB, Barr CL, Kennedy JL, Van Tol HHM, Kidd KK, Livak KJ . (1993): A hypervariable segment in the human dopamine receptor D4 (DRD4) gene. Hum Mol Genet 6: 767–773
Meador-Woodruff JH, Mansour A, Grandy DK, Damask SP, Civelli O, Watson SJ Jr . (1992): Distribution of D5 dopamine receptor mRNA in rat brain. Neurosci Lett 145: 209–212
Mrzljak L, Bergson C, Pappy M, Huff R, Levenson R, Goldman-Rakic PS . (1996): Localization of dopamine D4 receptors in GABAergic neurons of the primate brain. Nature 381: 245–248
Neve KA, Neve RL . (1997): Molecular biology of dopamine receptors. In Neve KA, Neve RL (eds), The Dopamine Receptors. Totowa, New Jersey: Humana Press. pp. 27–76
Oak JN, Oldenhof J, Van Tol HHM . (2000): The dopamine D4 receptor: One decade of research. Eur J Pharmacol 405: 303–327
Radja FR, El Mansari M, Soghominian JJ, Dewar KM, Ferron A, Reader TA, Descarries L . (1993): Changes of D1 and D2 receptors in adult rat neostriatum after neonatal dopamine denervation: quantitative data from ligand binding, in situ hybridization and iontophoresis. Neuroscience 57: 635–648
Roeltgen DP, Schneider JS . (1991): Chronic low-dose MPTP in nonhuman primates: a possible model for attention deficit disorder. J Child Neurol 6: S82–S89
Rowe DC, Stever C, Giedinghagen LN, Gard JM, Cleveland HH, Terris ST, Mohr JH, Sherman S, Abramowitz A, Waldman ID . (1998): Dopamine DRD4 receptor polymorphism and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. Mol Psychiatry 3: 419–426
Shaywitz RA, Yager RD, Klopper JH . (1976): Selective brain dopamine depletion in developing rats: An experimental model of minimal brain dysfunction. Science 191: 305–308
Svingos AL, Periasamy S, Pickel VM . (2000): Presynaptic dopamine D4 receptor localization in the rat nucleus accumbens shell. Synapse 36: 222–232
Swanson JM, Sunahara GA, Kennedy JL, Regino R, Fineberg E, Wigal T, Lerner M, Williams L, La Hoste GJ, Wigal S . (1998): Association of the dopamine receptor D4 (DRD4) gene with a refined phenotype of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Mol Psychiatry 3: 38–41
Tarazi FI, Campbell A, Yeghiayan SK, Baldessarini RJ . (1998a): Localization of dopamine receptor subtypes in caudate-putamen and nucleus accumbens septi of rat brain: Comparison of D1-, D2-, and D4-like receptors. Neuroscience 83: 169–176
Tarazi FI, Tomasini EC, Baldessarini RJ . (1998b): Postnatal development of D4-like receptors in rat forebrain: Comparison with D2-like receptors. Dev Brain Res 110: 227–233
Tarazi FI, Baldessarini RJ . (1999): Dopamine D4 receptors: significance for molecular psychiatry at the millenium. Mol Psychiatry 4: 529–538
Takasuna M, Iwasaki T . (1996): Active and passive avoidance learning in rats neonatally treated with intraventricular 6-hydroxydopamine. Behav Brain Res 74: 119–126
Teicher MH, Anderson SL, Campbell A, Gelbard HA, Baldessarini RJ . (1998): Progressive accumbens degeneration after neonatal striatal 6-hydroxydopamine in rats. Neurosci Lett 247: 99–102
Tucker DC, Johnson AK . (1981): Behavioral correlates of spontaneous hypertension. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 5: 463–471
Van Tol HHM, Wu CM, Guan H-C, Ohara K, Bunzow JR, Civelli O, Kennedy J, Seeman P, Niznik HB, Jovanovic V . (1992): Multiple dopamine D4 receptor variants in the human population. Nature 358: 149–152
Wilkinson LS, Dias R, Thomas KL, Augood SJ, Everitt BJ, Robbins TW, Roberts AC . (1997): Contrasting effects of excitotoxic lesions of the prefrontal cortex on the behavioral response to d-amphetamine and presynaptic and postsynaptic measures of striatal dopamine function in monkeys. Neuroscience 80: 717–730
Wool RS, Weldon DA, Shaywitz BA, Anderson GM, Cohen DJ, Teicher MH . (1987): Amphetamine reverses learning deficits in 6-hydroxydopamine-treated rat pups. Dev Psychobiol 20: 219–232
Zhang K, Tarazi FI, Baldessarini RJ . (2001a): Dopamine denervation enhances D4 receptor binding in rat caudate-putamen. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 69: 111–116
Zhang K, Tarazi FI, Baldessarini RJ . (2001b): Role of dopamine D4 receptors in motor hyperactivity induced by neonatal 6-hydroxydopamine lesions in rats. Neuropsychopharmacology (in press).
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by NIH grants MH-34006 (RJB), MH-47370 (RJB), a grant from the Bruce J. Anderson Foundation (RJB), the McLean Hospital Private Donors Neuropharmacology Research Fund (RJB), NARSAD Young Investigator Award (FIT), the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DA 516/1-1; ED), and the Livingston Fellowship from Harvard Medical School (KZ).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zhang, K., Tarazi, F., Davids, E. et al. Plasticity of Dopamine D4 Receptors in Rat Forebrain: Temporal Association with Motor Hyperactivity Following Neonatal 6-Hydroxydopamine Lesioning. Neuropsychopharmacol 26, 625–633 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0893-133X(01)00404-3
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0893-133X(01)00404-3
Keywords
This article is cited by
-
Neonatal 6-OHDA lesion model in mouse induces Attention-Deficit/ Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)-like behaviour
Scientific Reports (2018)
-
Tetramethylpyrazine Analogue CXC195 Protects Against Dopaminergic Neuronal Apoptosis via Activation of PI3K/Akt/GSK3β Signaling Pathway in 6-OHDA-Induced Parkinson’s Disease Mice
Neurochemical Research (2017)
-
Animal models of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): a critical review
ADHD Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorders (2010)
-
Pharmacological models of ADHD
Journal of Neural Transmission (2008)