1,720,967 research outputs found

    Modulation of opioid system in C57 mice after repeated treatment with morphine and naloxone: biochemical and behavioural correlates

    No full text
    C57 BL/6J (C57) mice display a particular pattern of responses following morphine administration, such as a rapid development of tolerance to the pharmacological action of the opiate and an increase in locomotor activity after a single injection of the drug. We have measured met-enkephalin content and the responsiveness of different opiate receptors after repeated administration of morphine and naloxone. Prolonged morphine administration changes neither met-enkephalin levels, nor the density of the opiate receptors in mice brain. In contrast repeated administration of the opiate antagonist naloxone, produced a marked increase in the number of 3H- DHM and 3H- DADLE binding sites in striatum and brainstem without modifying met-enkephalin concentrations. Behavioral studies have indicated that the morphine-induced increase in locomotor activity is enhanced in naloxone pretreated mice, thus suggesting a possible correlation between the behavioral response to morphine in C57 mice and the higher number of opiate receptors in the striatu

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore