1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Stressors can affect immobility time and response to imipramine in the rat forced swim test

      ,
      Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior
      Elsevier BV

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          We subjected Wistar rats to the forced swim test (FST) to compare the effects of two doses of imipramine in physically stressed rats (P: unavoidable electric footshocks), emotionally stressed rats (E: odors), or non-stressed rats (C). Stress or control sessions lasted 35 days. Drug treatments began on day 21 and continued for the next 14 days. E rats were placed for 10 min, once per day for 35 days, in a small non-movement-restricting cage impregnated with urine collected from a P rat. E and P rats exhibited opposite changes in locomotion. After 21 days of stress sessions, P rats displayed the longest immobility times in the FST, followed by E rats. In the P group, on day 7 of treatment (day 28 of the study), imipramine (2.5 mg/kg) reduced immobility time to baseline values. In the E group, immobility time decreased only after 14 days of treatment with the low imipramine dose. The high dose of imipramine (5.0 mg/kg) reduced immobility time at day 7 of treatment in all groups. In conclusion, physical and emotional stress similarly increased immobility time in the FST, but emotional stress appears to be more resistant to imipramine treatment.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior
          Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior
          Elsevier BV
          00913057
          February 2009
          February 2009
          : 91
          : 4
          : 542-548
          Article
          10.1016/j.pbb.2008.09.008
          18851989
          55b2c7d9-75a5-485b-8753-70fbd6d173f6
          © 2009

          https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

          History

          Comments

          Comment on this article