Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2009 Jan 11.
Published in final edited form as: Drug Alcohol Depend. 2007 Oct 24;93(1-2):63–71. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2007.08.020

Figure 2. Substitution and blockade of the discriminative stimulus effects of methamphetamine (1 mg/kg, i.p.).

Figure 2

Top panels show percent methamphetamine-lever appropriate responding. Bottom panels show rate of responding (r/s). Methamphetamine fully substituted for the discriminative stimulus effects of methamphetamine, but nicotine produced only partial substitution (left panels). Methamphetamine did not alter response rates at the doses tested. Nicotine dose-dependently decreased response rates. Asterisks show response rates different from vehicle control (p<0.05). Haloperidol fully blocked the discriminative stimulus effects of methamphetamine, whereas mecamylamine produced only a small attenuation of drug-appropriate responding (right panels). Haloperidol did not change response rates, whereas mecamylamine decreased rates. N=10 except where shown. Asterisks indicate response rates different from nicotine control (p<0.05). Nic=nicotine; Meth=methamphetamine. Hal= haloperidol; Mec=mecamylamine. Ctrl=control.