Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

View full-text article in PMC

. 2023 Jun 21;17:1202099. doi: 10.3389/fnbeh.2023.1202099

Search in PMC
Search in PubMed
View in NLM Catalog
Add to search

Copyright © 2023 Dunn, Robinson, Nwokafor, Estill, Ferrante, Shen, Lemchi, Creus-Muncunill, Ramirez, Mengaziol, Brynildsen, Leggas, Horn, Ehrlich and Blendy.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

PMC Copyright notice

3-trimester NOWS does not alter affective behavior or reward/reinstatement in adulthood. (A) Time spent in open arms in the elevated zero, during 5-min total test. For males, there was no effect of NOWS treatment (Effect size = 0.002). For females, there was a modest effect of NOWS treatment [F(1,41) = 2.9, p < 0.1]. (B) Entries into the open arm during elevated zero maze. There was no effect of NOWS treatment in either sex (Males, Effect Size = 0.008, Females, Effect Size = 0.02). (C) Time immobile in the tail-suspension test. There was no effect by NOWS treatment in either sex (Males, Effect Size = 0.005; Females, Effect Size = 0.04). (D) Number of failures to escape foot shock in a learned helplessness test. There was no effect of NOWS treatment in either sex (Males, Effect Size = 0.005; Females, Effect Size = 0.02). (E,F) Escape latency over 25 trials in the learned helplessness test. There was no effect of NOWS treatment in males (Effect size = 0.03) or females (Effect size = 0.02). (G) Morphine conditioned-place preference in male adult mice. There was a significant effect of CPP session [F(1,34) = 36.1, p < 0.001] but no effect of NOWS treatment. (H) Morphine conditioned-place preference in female adult mice. There was a significant effect of CPP session [F (1,38) = 8.4, p < 0.01], but no effect of NOWS treatment. (I) Locomotor sensitization during CPP morphine conditioning sessions in male mice. There was a significant effect of conditioning session [F(3,105), p < 0.001], but no effect of NOWS treatment. There was a modest NOWS x session interaction [F(3,105) = 2.3, p < 0.1]. (J) Locomotor sensitization during CPP morphine conditioning sessions in female mice. There was a significant effect of conditioning session [F(3,117) = 145.3, p < 0.001], but no effect of NOWS treatment. (K) Number of nose pokes in daily 2-h remifentanil (0.1 mg/kg/infusion) IV-self-administration sessions. Sessions included 2 training sessions in which both nose pokes delivered drug infusions, 6 sessions of FR1 reinforcement and 4 sessions of FR2 reinforcement. There was a significant effect of session [F(10,110) = 11.4, p < 0.001], but no effect of NOWS treatment. (L) Breakpoint for progressive ratio with 0.1 mg/kg/infusion remifentanil. There was no effect of NOWS treatment on PR breakpoint. All data was generated from 16 total litters (6 saline, 10 NOWS).