This is an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. Nature Research are providing this early version of the manuscript as a service to our authors and readers. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting and a proof review before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers apply.

Pharmacokinetic, behavioral, and brain activity effects of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol in adolescent male and female rats

Abstract

Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the intoxicating constituent of cannabis and is responsible for the drug’s reinforcing effects. Retrospective human studies suggest that cannabis use during adolescence is linked to long-term negative psychological outcomes, but in such studies it is difficult to distinguish the effects of THC from those of coexisting factors. Therefore, translationally relevant animal models are required to properly investigate THC effects in adolescents. However, though the relevance of these studies depends upon human-relevant dosing, surprisingly little is known about THC pharmacology and its effects on behavior and brain activity in adolescent rodents—especially in females. Here, we conducted a systematic investigation of THC pharmacokinetics, metabolism and distribution in blood and brain, and of THC effects upon behavior and neural activity in adolescent Long Evans rats of both sexes. We administered THC during an early-middle adolescent window (postnatal days 27–45) in which the brain may be particularly sensitive to developmental perturbation by THC. We determined the pharmacokinetic profile of THC and its main first-pass metabolites (11-hydroxy-THC and 11-nor-9-carboxy-THC) in blood and brain following acute injection (0.5 or 5 mg/kg, intraperitoneal). We also evaluated THC effects on behavioral assays of anxiety, locomotion, and place conditioning, as well as c-Fos expression in 14 brain regions. Confirming previous work, we find marked sex differences in THC metabolism, including a female-specific elevation in the bioactive metabolite 11-hydroxy-THC. Furthermore, we find dose-dependent and sex-dependent effects on behavior, neural activity, and functional connectivity across multiple nodes of brain stress and reward networks. Our findings are relevant for interpreting results of rat adolescent THC exposure studies, and may lend new insights into how THC impacts the brain in a sex-dependent manner.

11-OH-THC and 11-COOH-THC, after IP injection of THC, 0.5 mg/kg (left panel: ae) or 5 mg/kg (right panel: gl), in female (black) or male (gray) adolescent rats. Lines represent the mean ± SEM, n = 4/sex and dose group at each timepoint (15, 30, 60, 120, 240, 480 min post THC). Adjacent bar graphs represent total exposure (area under the curve, AUC, pmol/min/mL) to THC, 11-OH-THC and 11-COOH-THC, respectively, in females or males after 0.5 mg/kg (b, d, f) or 5 mg/kg THC (h, j, l). Bars represent the mean ± SEM, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.

11-OH-THC and 11-COOH-THC, after IP injection of THC, 0.5 mg/kg (left panel, ae) or 5 mg/kg (right panel, gl), in female (black) or male (gray) adolescent rats, n = 4/group. Adjacent bar graphs represent total exposure (area under the curve, AUC, pmol/min/mL) to THC, 11-OH-THC and 11-COOH-THC, respectively, for females or males after 0.5 mg/kg (b, d, f) or 5 mg/kg THC (h, j, l). *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.

Effects of vehicle (Veh; White bars/dashed lines) or THC (0.5 mg/kg: gray bars and lines; 5 mg/kg: black bars and lines) on behaviors are shown. In adolescent female rats (ah), (a) THC did not affect the percentage of time spent on the open arms of the elevated plus maze (conducted 30–35 min post-THC), but (b) in the open field test (30–40 min post-THC), 5 mg/kg THC decreased time spent in the center of the novel environment, which is considered to be an anxiety-like phenotype. c locomotor activity was also suppressed over the 60 min session by 5 mg/kg THC, and (d) this effect was especially prominent from 30–45 min after i.p. injection (the first 15 min of the session). e Rearing onto the hind legs was also strongly suppressed by 5 mg/kg THC, (f) again most prominently in the first 15 min of the test. g When injected 10 min prior to 30 min training sessions, neither THC dose induced either a conditioned place preference or aversion in females, (h) nor did THC affect time spent in the unpaired neutral zone in the 3-chamber apparatus. In adolescent male rats (I-P), Neither THC dose affected (i) percent time on the open arms of the plus maze, (j) percent time in the center of the open field, or (k) locomotor activity in the whole session, or (l) at any timepoint. As in females, (m) rearing was suppressed by 5 mg/kg THC, (n) especially in the first 15 min of the test. o 0.5 mg/kg THC induced a place preference, while 5 mg/kg THC induced a place aversion. p Neither dose impacted time in the central neutral zone. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.

In females (ac; gi), THC dose-dependently induced Fos immunoreactivity in several structures, as indicated by *symbol under bars that significantly differ from vehicle in that structure. Vehicle-treated rats = white bars, 0.5 mg/kg THC rats = gray bars, 5 mg/kg THC rats = black. Individual rat data is represented with dots. In males (df; jl), data are represented using the same scheme. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001 as indicated, or adjacent to structure name in Dose main effect without significant post-hoc. BLA basolateral amygdala, CeA central amygdala, BNST bed nucleus of the stria terminalis, PLC prelimbic medial prefrontal cortex, ILC infralimbic mPFC, CA1-3 cornus ammoni regions 1-3, DG dentate gyrus, NAcC/NAcSh nucleus accumbens core/shell, RVP/CVP rostral/caudal ventral pallidum, MHb/LHb medial/lateral habenula, tVTA tail of the ventral tegmental area.

Effects of 0.5 mg/kg THC on functional coupling (left; blue lines representing strength of Fos co-activation, relative to vehicle-injected rats), or functional de-coupling (right; purple lines representing strength of Fos de-coupling, relative to vehicle rats) is shown in females (a), and males (b). Effects of 5 mg/kg THC, relative to vehicle, are represented using the same logic in females (e), and males (f). Effects of THC doses on global network connectivity (THC-induced change in overall regional Fos cross-correlation) are shown in females (c) and males (d). *p = 0.01, ***p < 0.0001.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    Malone DT, Hill MN, Rubino T. Adolescent cannabis use and psychosis: epidemiology and neurodevelopmental models. Br J Pharm. 2010;160:511–22.

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Chadwick B, Miller ML, Hurd YL. Cannabis use during adolescent development: susceptibility to psychiatric illness. Front Psychiatry. 2013;4:129.

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Rubino T, Zamberletti E, Parolaro D. Adolescent exposure to cannabis as a risk factor for psychiatric disorders. J Psychopharmacol. 2012;26:177–88.

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Volkow ND, Swanson JM, Evins AE, DeLisi LE, Meier MH, Gonzalez R, et al. Effects of cannabis use on human behavior, including cognition, motivation, and psychosis: a review. JAMA Psychiatry. 2016;73:292–7.

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Ehrenreich H, Rinn T, Kunert HJ, Moeller MR, Poser W, Schilling L, et al. Specific attentional dysfunction in adults following early start of cannabis use. Psychopharmacology. 1999;142:295–301.

    Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Spear LP. Consequences of adolescent use of alcohol and other drugs: Studies using rodent models. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2016;70:228–43.

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Gomes FV, Guimaraes FS, Grace AA. Effects of pubertal cannabinoid administration on attentional set-shifting and dopaminergic hyper-responsivity in a developmental disruption model of schizophrenia. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2015;18.

  8. 8.

    Abela AR, Rahbarnia A, Wood S, Le AD, Fletcher PJ. Adolescent exposure to Delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol delays acquisition of paired-associates learning in adulthood. Psychopharmacology. 2019;236:1875–86.

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Rubino T, Realini N, Braida D, Guidi S, Capurro V, Vigano D, et al. Changes in hippocampal morphology and neuroplasticity induced by adolescent THC treatment are associated with cognitive impairment in adulthood. Hippocampus 2009;19:763–72.

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    O’Shea M, Singh ME, McGregor IS, Mallet PE. Chronic cannabinoid exposure produces lasting memory impairment and increased anxiety in adolescent but not adult rats. J Psychopharmacol. 2004;18:502–8.

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Rubino T, Realini N, Braida D, Alberio T, Capurro V, Vigano D, et al. The depressive phenotype induced in adult female rats by adolescent exposure to THC is associated with cognitive impairment and altered neuroplasticity in the prefrontal cortex. Neurotox Res. 2009;15:291–302.

    Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Quinn HR, Matsumoto I, Callaghan PD, Long LE, Arnold JC, Gunasekaran N, et al. Adolescent rats find repeated Delta(9)-THC less aversive than adult rats but display greater residual cognitive deficits and changes in hippocampal protein expression following exposure. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2008;33:1113–26.

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Rubino T, Vigano D, Realini N, Guidali C, Braida D, Capurro V, et al. Chronic delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol during adolescence provokes sex-dependent changes in the emotional profile in adult rats: behavioral and biochemical correlates. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2008;33:2760–71.

    Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Keeley RJ, Trow J, Bye C, McDonald RJ. Part II: Strain- and sex-specific effects of adolescent exposure to THC on adult brain and behaviour: Variants of learning, anxiety and volumetric estimates. Behav Brain Res. 2015;288:132–52.

    Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Lecca D, Scifo A, Pisanu A, Valentini V, Piras G, Sil A, et al. Adolescent cannabis exposure increases heroin reinforcement in rats genetically vulnerable to addiction. Neuropharmacology. 2020;166:107974.

    Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Ellgren M, Spano SM, Hurd YL. Adolescent cannabis exposure alters opiate intake and opioid limbic neuronal populations in adult rats. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2007;32:607–15.

    Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Friedman AL, Meurice C, Jutkiewicz EM. Effects of adolescent Delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol exposure on the behavioral effects of cocaine in adult Sprague-Dawley rats. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2019;27:326–37.

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Panlilio LV, Solinas M, Matthews SA, Goldberg SR. Previous exposure to THC alters the reinforcing efficacy and anxiety-related effects of cocaine in rats. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2007;32:646–57.

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Stopponi S, Soverchia L, Ubaldi M, Cippitelli A, Serpelloni G, Ciccocioppo R. Chronic THC during adolescence increases the vulnerability to stress-induced relapse to heroin seeking in adult rats. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. 2014;24:1037–45.

    Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Panlilio LV, Zanettini C, Barnes C, Solinas M, Goldberg SR. Prior exposure to THC increases the addictive effects of nicotine in rats. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2013;38:1198–208.

    Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Burgdorf CE, Jing D, Yang R, Huang C, Hill MN, Mackie K, et al. Endocannabinoid genetic variation enhances vulnerability to THC reward in adolescent female mice. Sci Adv. 2020;6:eaay1502.

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Rubino T, Parolaro D. Sexually dimorphic effects of cannabinoid compounds on emotion and cognition. Front Behav Neurosci. 2011;5:64.

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Craft RM, Britch SC, Buzitis NW, Clowers BH. Age-related differences in Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol-induced antinociception in female and male rats. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2019;27:338–47.

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Wagner EJ. Sex differences in cannabinoid-regulated biology: a focus on energy homeostasis. Front Neuroendocrinol. 2016;40:101–9.

    Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Nguyen JD, Creehan KM, Kerr TM, Taffe MA. Lasting effects of repeated (9) -tetrahydrocannabinol vapour inhalation during adolescence in male and female rats. Br J Pharm. 2020;177:188–203.

    Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Silva L, Harte-Hargrove L, Izenwasser S, Frank A, Wade D, Dow-Edwards D. Sex-specific alterations in hippocampal cannabinoid 1 receptor expression following adolescent delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol treatment in the rat. Neurosci Lett. 2015;602:89–94.

    Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Prini P, Rusconi F, Zamberletti E, Gabaglio M, Penna F, Fasano M, et al. Adolescent THC exposure in female rats leads to cognitive deficits through a mechanism involving chromatin modifications in the prefrontal cortex. J Psychiatry Neurosci. 2018;43:87–101.

    Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Burston JJ, Wiley JL, Craig AA, Selley DE, Sim-Selley LJ. Regional enhancement of cannabinoid CB1 receptor desensitization in female adolescent rats following repeated Delta-tetrahydrocannabinol exposure. Br J Pharm. 2010;161:103–12.

    Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Craft RM, Marusich JA, Wiley JL. Sex differences in cannabinoid pharmacology: a reflection of differences in the endocannabinoid system? Life Sci. 2013;92:476–81.

    Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Weed PF, Filipeanu CM, Ketchum MJ, Winsauer PJ. Chronic delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol during adolescence differentially modulates striatal CB1 receptor expression and the acute and chronic effects on learning in adult rats. J Pharm Exp Ther. 2016;356:20–31.

    Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Rubino T, Parolaro D. Sex-dependent vulnerability to cannabis abuse in adolescence. Front Psychiatry. 2015;6:56.

    Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Gorzalka BB, Hill MN, Chang SC. Male-female differences in the effects of cannabinoids on sexual behavior and gonadal hormone function. Horm Behav. 2010;58:91–9.

    Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Craft RM. Sex differences in behavioral effects of cannabinoids. Life Sci. 2005;77:2471–8.

    Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Calakos KC, Bhatt S, Foster DW, Cosgrove KP. Mechanisms underlying sex differences in cannabis use. Curr Addict Rep. 2017;4:439–53.

    Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Schlienz NJ, Budney AJ, Lee DC, Vandrey R. Cannabis withdrawal: a review of neurobiological mechanisms and sex differences. Curr Addict Rep. 2017;4:75–81.

    Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Cooper ZD, Craft RM. Sex-dependent effects of cannabis and cannabinoids: a translational perspective. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2018;43:34–51.

    Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Wiley JL, Burston JJ. Sex differences in Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol metabolism and in vivo pharmacology following acute and repeated dosing in adolescent rats. Neurosci Lett. 2014;576:51–5.

    Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Schneider M. Puberty as a highly vulnerable developmental period for the consequences of cannabis exposure. Addict Biol. 2008;13:253–63.

    Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Silva L, Black R, Michaelides M, Hurd YL, Dow-Edwards D. Sex and age specific effects of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol during the periadolescent period in the rat: the unique susceptibility of the prepubescent animal. Neurotoxicol Teratol. 2016;58:88–100.

  40. 40.

    Vozella V, Zibardi C, Ahmed F, Piomelli D. Fast and sensitive quantification of delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol and its main oxidative metabolites by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry. Cannabis Cannabinoid Res. 2019;4:110–23.

    Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Kubilius RA, Kaplick PM, Wotjak CT. Highway to hell or magic smoke? The dose-dependence of Delta(9)-THC in place conditioning paradigms. Learn Mem. 2018;25:446–54.

    Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Bolton JL, Ruiz CM, Rismanchi N, Sanchez GA, Castillo E, Huang J, et al. Early-life adversity facilitates acquisition of cocaine self-administration and induces persistent anhedonia. Neurobiol Stress. 2018;8:57–67.

    Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    Bardo MT, Rowlett JK, Harris MJ. Conditioned place preference using opiate and stimulant drugs: a meta-analysis. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 1995;19:39–51.

    Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Braida D, Iosue S, Pegorini S, Sala M. Delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol-induced conditioned place preference and intracerebroventricular self-administration in rats. Eur J Pharm. 2004;506:63–9.

    Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Muller R, Bravo R, Burckhardt J, Curran T. Induction of c-fos gene and protein by growth factors precedes activation of c-myc. Nature. 1984;312:716–20.

    Google Scholar 

  46. 46.

    Mahler SV, Vazey EM, Beckley JT, Keistler CR, McGlinchey EM, Kaufling J, et al. Designer receptors show role for ventral pallidum input to ventral tegmental area in cocaine seeking. Nat Neurosci. 2014;17:577–85.

    Google Scholar 

  47. 47.

    Smith KS, Berridge KC. The ventral pallidum and hedonic reward: neurochemical maps of sucrose “liking” and food intake. J Neuroscience. 2005;25:8637–49.

    Google Scholar 

  48. 48.

    Jhou TC, Fields HL, Baxter MG, Saper CB, Holland PC. The rostromedial tegmental nucleus (RMTg), a GABAergic afferent to midbrain dopamine neurons, encodes aversive stimuli and inhibits motor responses. Neuron. 2009;61:786–800.

    Google Scholar 

  49. 49.

    Kaufling J, Aston-Jones G. Persistent adaptations in afferents to ventral tegmental dopamine neurons after opiate withdrawal. J Neurosci. 2015;35:10290–303.

    Google Scholar 

  50. 50.

    Flores A, Maldonado R, Berrendero F. The hypocretin/orexin receptor-1 as a novel target to modulate cannabinoid reward. Biol Psychiatry. 2014;75:499–507.

    Google Scholar 

  51. 51.

    Flores A, Julia-Hernandez M, Maldonado R, Berrendero F. Involvement of the orexin/hypocretin system in the pharmacological effects induced by Delta(9) -tetrahydrocannabinol. Br J Pharm. 2016;173:1381–92.

    Google Scholar 

  52. 52.

    Torrens A, Vozella V, Huff H, McNeil B, Ahmed F, Ghidini A, et al. Comparative pharmacokinetics of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol in adolescent and adult male mice. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2020;374:151–160.

  53. 53.

    Mahler SV, Aston-Jones GS. Fos activation of selective afferents to ventral tegmental area during cue-induced reinstatement of cocaine seeking in rats. J Neurosci. 2012;32:13309–26.

    Google Scholar 

  54. 54.

    Pertwee RG. Cannabinoid pharmacology: the first 66 years. Br J Pharm. 2006;147:S163–71.

    Google Scholar 

  55. 55.

    Agurell S, Halldin M, Lindgren JE, Ohlsson A, Widman M, Gillespie H, et al. Pharmacokinetics and metabolism of delta 1-tetrahydrocannabinol and other cannabinoids with emphasis on man. Pharm Rev. 1986;38:21–43.

    Google Scholar 

  56. 56.

    Yamamoto I, Watanabe K, Matsunaga T, Kimura T, Funahashi T, Yoshimura H. Pharmacology and toxicology of major constituents of marijuana—on the metabolic activation of cannabinoids and its mechanism. J Toxicol. 2003;22:577–89.

    Google Scholar 

  57. 57.

    Browne RG, Weissman A. Discriminative stimulus properties of delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol: mechanistic studies. J Clin Pharm. 1981;21:227S–34S.

    Google Scholar 

  58. 58.

    Tseng AH, Craft RM. Sex differences in antinociceptive and motoric effects of cannabinoids. Eur J Pharm. 2001;430:41–7.

    Google Scholar 

  59. 59.

    Tseng AH, Harding JW, Craft RM. Pharmacokinetic factors in sex differences in Delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol-induced behavioral effects in rats. Behav Brain Res. 2004;154:77–83.

    Google Scholar 

  60. 60.

    Britch SC, Wiley JL, Yu Z, Clowers BH, Craft RM. Cannabidiol-Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol interactions on acute pain and locomotor activity. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2017;175:187–97.

    Google Scholar 

  61. 61.

    Narimatsu S, Watanabe K, Yamamoto I, Yoshimura H. Sex difference in the oxidative metabolism of delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol in the rat. Biochem Pharm. 1991;41:1187–94.

    Google Scholar 

  62. 62.

    Compton DR, Rice KC, De Costa BR, Razdan RK, Melvin LS, Johnson MR, et al. Cannabinoid structure-activity relationships: correlation of receptor binding and in vivo activities. J Pharm Exp Ther. 1993;265:218–26.

    Google Scholar 

  63. 63.

    Nye JS, Seltzman HH, Pitt CG, Snyder SH. High-affinity cannabinoid binding sites in brain membranes labeled with [3H]-5’-trimethylammonium delta 8-tetrahydrocannabinol. J Pharm Exp Ther. 1985;234:784–91.

    Google Scholar 

  64. 64.

    Nadulski T, Pragst F, Weinberg G, Roser P, Schnelle M, Fronk EM, et al. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study about the effects of cannabidiol (CBD) on the pharmacokinetics of Delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) after oral application of THC verses standardized cannabis extract. Ther Drug Monit. 2005;27:799–810.

    Google Scholar 

  65. 65.

    Greenfield SF, Back SE, Lawson K, Brady KT. Substance abuse in women. Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2010;33:339–55.

    Google Scholar 

  66. 66.

    Colizzi M, Weltens N, McGuire P, Van Oudenhove L, Bhattacharyya S. Descriptive psychopathology of the acute effects of intravenous delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol administration in humans. Brain Sci. 2019;9:93.

  67. 67.

    Wiley JL, Lefever TW, Marusich JA, Craft RM. Comparison of the discriminative stimulus and response rate effects of (Delta9)-tetrahydrocannabinol and synthetic cannabinoids in female and male rats. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2017;172:51–59.

    Google Scholar 

  68. 68.

    Renard J, Szkudlarek HJ, Kramar CP, Jobson CEL, Moura K, Rushlow WJ, et al. Adolescent THC exposure causes enduring prefrontal cortical disruption of GABAergic inhibition and dysregulation of sub-cortical dopamine function. Sci Rep. 2017;7:11420.

    Google Scholar 

  69. 69.

    Caballero A, Tseng KY. Association of cannabis use during adolescence, prefrontal CB1 receptor signaling, and schizophrenia. Front Pharmacol. 2012;3:101.

    Google Scholar 

  70. 70.

    Bossong MG, Niesink RJ. Adolescent brain maturation, the endogenous cannabinoid system and the neurobiology of cannabis-induced schizophrenia. Prog Neurobiol. 2010;92:370–85.

    Google Scholar 

  71. 71.

    Tooley J, Marconi L, Alipio JB, Matikainen-Ankney B, Georgiou P, Kravitz AV, et al. Glutamatergic ventral pallidal neurons modulate activity of the habenula-tegmental circuitry and constrain reward seeking. Biol Psychiatry. 2018;83:1012–23.

    Google Scholar 

  72. 72.

    Faget L, Zell V, Souter E, McPherson A, Ressler R, Gutierrez-Reed N, et al. Opponent control of behavioral reinforcement by inhibitory and excitatory projections from the ventral pallidum. Nat Commun. 2018;9:849.

    Google Scholar 

  73. 73.

    Smith KS, Tindell AJ, Aldridge JW, Berridge KC. Ventral pallidum roles in reward and motivation. Behav Brain Res. 2009;196:155–67.

    Google Scholar 

  74. 74.

    LeDoux JE. Emotion circuits in the brain. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2000;23:155–84.

    Google Scholar 

  75. 75.

    Lecca S, Meye FJ, Mameli M. The lateral habenula in addiction and depression: an anatomical, synaptic and behavioral overview. Eur J Neurosci. 2014;39:1170–8.

    Google Scholar 

  76. 76.

    Bolton JL, Molet J, Regev L, Chen Y, Rismanchi N, Haddad E, et al. Anhedonia FOllowing Early-life Adversity Involves Aberrant Interaction of Reward and Anxiety Circuits and Is Reversed by Partial Silencing of Amygdala Corticotropin-releasing Hormone Gene. Biol Psychiatry. 2018;83:137–47.

    Google Scholar 

  77. 77.

    Di Forti M, Morrison PD, Butt A, Murray RM. Cannabis use and psychiatric and cogitive disorders: the chicken or the egg? Curr Opin Psychiatry. 2007;20:228–34.

    Google Scholar 

  78. 78.

    Reynolds SM, Berridge KC. Emotional environments retune the valence of appetitive versus fearful functions in nucleus accumbens. Nat Neurosci. 2008;11:423–5.

    Google Scholar 

  79. 79.

    Al-Hasani R, McCall JG, Shin G, Gomez AM, Schmitz GP, Bernardi JM, et al. Distinct subpopulations of nucleus accumbens dynorphin neurons drive aversion and reward. Neuron 2015;87:1063–77.

    Google Scholar 

  80. 80.

    Carlezon WA Jr., Thomas MJ. Biological substrates of reward and aversion: a nucleus accumbens activity hypothesis. Neuropharmacology. 2009;56:122–32.

    Google Scholar 

  81. 81.

    Volman SF, Lammel S, Margolis EB, Kim Y, Richard JM, Roitman MF, et al. New insights into the specificity and plasticity of reward and aversion encoding in the mesolimbic system. J Neurosci. 2013;33:17569–76.

    Google Scholar 

  82. 82.

    McCutcheon JE, Ebner SR, Loriaux AL, Roitman MF. Encoding of aversion by dopamine and the nucleus accumbens. Front Neurosci. 2012;6:137.

    Google Scholar 

  83. 83.

    Wenzel JM, Rauscher NA, Cheer JF, Oleson EB. A role for phasic dopamine release within the nucleus accumbens in encoding aversion: a review of the neurochemical literature. ACS Chem Neurosci. 2015;6:16–26.

    Google Scholar 

  84. 84.

    Klawonn AM, Malenka RC. Nucleus accumbens modulation in reward and aversion. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol. 2018;83:119–29.

    Google Scholar 

  85. 85.

    Floresco SB. The nucleus accumbens: an interface between cognition, emotion, and action. Annu Rev Psychol. 2015;66:25–52.

    Google Scholar 

  86. 86.

    Salvatore M, Wiersielis KR, Luz S, Waxler DE, Bhatnagar S, Bangasser DA. Sex differences in circuits activated by corticotropin releasing factor in rats. Horm Behav. 2018;97:145–53.

    Google Scholar 

  87. 87.

    McReynolds JR, Christianson JP, Blacktop JM, Mantsch JR. What does the Fos say? Using Fos-based approaches to understand the contribution of stress to substance use disorders. Neurobiol Stress. 2018;9:271–85.

    Google Scholar 

  88. 88.

    Rogers-Carter MM, Varela JA, Gribbons KB, Pierce AF, McGoey MT, Ritchey M, et al. Insular cortex mediates approach and avoidance responses to social affective stimuli. Nat Neurosci. 2018;21:404–14.

    Google Scholar 

  89. 89.

    Kim DJ, Skosnik PD, Cheng H, Pruce BJ, Brumbaugh MS, Vollmer JM, et al. Structural network topology revealed by white matter tractography in cannabis users: a graph theoretical analysis. Brain Connect. 2011;1:473–83.

    Google Scholar 

  90. 90.

    Ramaekers JG, van Wel JH, Spronk D, Franke B, Kenis G, Toennes SW, et al. Cannabis and cocaine decrease cognitive impulse control and functional corticostriatal connectivity in drug users with low activity DBH genotypes. Brain Imaging Behav. 2016;10:1254–63.

    Google Scholar 

  91. 91.

    Wall MB, Pope R, Freeman TP, Kowalczyk OS, Demetriou L, Mokrysz C, et al. Dissociable effects of cannabis with and without cannabidiol on the human brain’s resting-state functional connectivity. J Psychopharmacol. 2019;33:822–30.

    Google Scholar 

  92. 92.

    Bloomfield MAP, Hindocha C, Green SF, Wall MB, Lees R, Petrilli K, et al. The neuropsychopharmacology of cannabis: A review of human imaging studies. Pharm Ther. 2019;195:132–61.

    Google Scholar 

  93. 93.

    Cooper ZD, Haney M. Comparison of subjective, pharmacokinetic, and physiological effects of marijuana smoked as joints and blunts. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2009;103:107–13.

    Google Scholar 

  94. 94.

    Huestis MA, Henningfield JE, Cone EJ. Blood cannabinoids. I. Absorption of THC and formation of 11-OH-THC and THCCOOH during and after smoking marijuana. J Anal Toxicol. 1992;16:276–82.

    Google Scholar 

  95. 95.

    Fattore L, Spano MS, Altea S, Angius F, Fadda P, Fratta W. Cannabinoid self-administration in rats: sex differences and the influence of ovarian function. Br J Pharm. 2007;152:795–804.

    Google Scholar 

  96. 96.

    Barrus DG, Capogrossi KL, Cates SC, Gourdet CK, Peiper NC, Novak SP, et al. Tasty THC: promises and challenges of cannabis edibles. Methods Rep. 2016;2016.

  97. 97.

    Freels TG, Baxter-Potter LN, Lugo JM, Glodosky NC, Wright HR, Baglot SL, et al. Vaporized cannabis extracts have reinforcing properties and support conditioned drug-seeking behavior in rats. J Neurosci. 2020;40:1897–908.

    Google Scholar 

  98. 98.

    Kirschmann EK, McCalley DM, Edwards CM, Torregrossa MM. Consequences of adolescent exposure to the cannabinoid receptor agonist WIN55,212-2 on working memory in female rats. Front Behav Neurosci. 2017;11:137.

    Google Scholar 

  99. 99.

    Noriega NC, Howdeshell KL, Furr J, Lambright CR, Wilson VS, Gray LE Jr. Pubertal administration of DEHP delays puberty, suppresses testosterone production, and inhibits reproductive tract development in male Sprague-Dawley and Long-Evans rats. Toxicol Sci. 2009;111:163–78.

    Google Scholar 

  100. 100.

    Rayner JL, Wood C, Fenton SE. Exposure parameters necessary for delayed puberty and mammary gland development in Long-Evans rats exposed in utero to atrazine. Toxicol Appl Pharm. 2004;195:23–34.

    Google Scholar 

  101. 101.

    Whitlow CT, Freedland CS, Porrino LJ. Functional consequences of the repeated administration of Delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol in the rat. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2003;71:169–77.

    Google Scholar 

  102. 102.

    Farquhar CE, Breivogel CS, Gamage TF, Gay EA, Thomas BF, Craft RM, et al. Sex, THC, and hormones: effects on density and sensitivity of CB1 cannabinoid receptors in rats. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2019;194:20–27.

    Google Scholar 

  103. 103.

    Craft RM, Haas AE, Wiley JL, Yu Z, Clowers BH. Gonadal hormone modulation of (9)-tetrahydrocannabinol-induced antinociception and metabolism in female versus male rats. Pharm Biochem Behav. 2017;152:36–43.

    Google Scholar 

  104. 104.

    Kervezee L, Hartman R, van den Berg DJ, Meijer JH, de Lange ECM. Diurnal variation in the pharmacokinetics and brain distribution of morphine and its major metabolite. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2017;109S:S132–S39.

    Google Scholar 

  105. 105.

    Farrell MR, Ruiz CM, Castillo E, Faget L, Khanbijian C, Liu S, et al. Ventral pallidum is essential for cocaine relapse after voluntary abstinence in rats. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2019;44:2174–85.

    Google Scholar 

  106. 106.

    Paxinos G, Watson C. The rat brain in stereotaxic coordinates. 6th edn. Amsterdam; Boston: Academic Press/Elsevier; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Brandon McNeil for assistance with tissue collection.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

CMR: conceived of and collected behavioral data and wrote manuscript. AT: conceived of and collected pharmacokinetic data and wrote manuscript. EC: collected and analyzed Fos expression data. CRP: collected and analyzed behavioral data. JC: collected and analyzed behavioral data. VI: collected and analyzed Fos staining data. EH: collected and analyzed behavioral data. DJ: analyzed behavioral data. MAH: conceived of, and advised development of project. VS: conducted network analyses of Fos data. DP: conceived of and led pharmacokinetic studies and wrote manuscript. SVM: conceived of and led behavior and Fos studies and wrote manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Daniele Piomelli or Stephen V. Mahler.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ruiz, C.M., Torrens, A., Castillo, E. et al. Pharmacokinetic, behavioral, and brain activity effects of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol in adolescent male and female rats. Neuropsychopharmacol. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41386-020-00839-w

Download citation

Search

Quick links