These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

118 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24896722)

  • 1. Individual differences in novelty-induced activity and the rewarding effects of novelty and amphetamine in rats.
    Robinet PM; Rowlett JK; Bardo MT
    Behav Processes; 1998 Jul; 44(1):1-9. PubMed ID: 24896722
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Individual differences in novelty seeking on the playground maze predict amphetamine conditioned place preference.
    Klebaur JE; Bardo MT
    Pharmacol Biochem Behav; 1999 May; 63(1):131-6. PubMed ID: 10340533
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Strain differences in response to escapable and inescapable novel environments and their ability to predict amphetamine-induced locomotor activity.
    Miserendino MJ; Haile CN; Kosten TA
    Psychopharmacology (Berl); 2003 May; 167(3):281-90. PubMed ID: 12664191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Differential effects of novelty exposure on place preference conditioning to amphetamine and its oral consumption.
    Pelloux Y; Costentin J; Duterte-Boucher D
    Psychopharmacology (Berl); 2004 Jan; 171(3):277-85. PubMed ID: 12961061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Individual differences in behavioral responses to novelty and amphetamine self-administration in male and female rats.
    Klebaur JE; Bevins RA; Segar TM; Bardo MT
    Behav Pharmacol; 2001 Jul; 12(4):267-75. PubMed ID: 11548112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Genetics of novelty seeking, amphetamine self-administration and reinstatement using inbred rats.
    Meyer AC; Rahman S; Charnigo RJ; Dwoskin LP; Crabbe JC; Bardo MT
    Genes Brain Behav; 2010 Oct; 9(7):790-8. PubMed ID: 20618445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Individual differences in rats' reactivity to novelty and the unconditioned and conditioned locomotor effects of methamphetamine.
    Bevins RA; Peterson JL
    Pharmacol Biochem Behav; 2004 Sep; 79(1):65-74. PubMed ID: 15388285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Differences in locomotor response to an inescapable novel environment predict sensitivity to aversive effects of amphetamine.
    Kunin D; Gaskin S; Borjas MB; Smith BR; Amit Z
    Behav Pharmacol; 2001 Feb; 12(1):61-7. PubMed ID: 11270513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The effects of anxiolytic drugs on novelty-induced place preference.
    Klebaur JE; Bardo MT
    Behav Brain Res; 1999 May; 101(1):51-7. PubMed ID: 10342399
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Susceptibility to morphine place conditioning: relationship with stress-induced locomotion and novelty-seeking behavior in juvenile and adult rats.
    Zheng X; Ke X; Tan B; Luo X; Xu W; Yang X; Sui N
    Pharmacol Biochem Behav; 2003 Jul; 75(4):929-35. PubMed ID: 12957238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Independence of amphetamine reward from locomotor stimulation demonstrated by conditioned place preference.
    Carr GD; Phillips AG; Fibiger HC
    Psychopharmacology (Berl); 1988; 94(2):221-6. PubMed ID: 3127848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Novelty response and 50 kHz ultrasonic vocalizations: Differential prediction of locomotor and affective response to amphetamine in Sprague-Dawley rats.
    Garcia EJ; Cain ME
    Psychopharmacology (Berl); 2016 Feb; 233(4):625-37. PubMed ID: 26564232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Individual differences in the effect of novel environmental stimuli prior to amphetamine self-administration in rats (Rattus norvegicus).
    Cain ME; Dotson WF; Bardo MT
    Exp Clin Psychopharmacol; 2006 Aug; 14(3):389-401. PubMed ID: 16893281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Novelty preference predicts place preference conditioning to morphine and its oral consumption in rats.
    Pelloux Y; Costentin J; Duterte-Boucher D
    Pharmacol Biochem Behav; 2006 May; 84(1):43-50. PubMed ID: 16733065
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Individual differences in response to novelty, amphetamine-induced activity and drug discrimination in rats.
    Bevins RA; Klebaur JE; Bardo MT
    Behav Pharmacol; 1997 Jun; 8(2-3):113-23. PubMed ID: 9833007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Evidence that the relations between novelty-induced activity, locomotor stimulation and place preference induced by cocaine qualitatively depend upon the dose: a multiple regression analysis in inbred C57BL/6J mice.
    Brabant C; Quertemont E; Tirelli E
    Behav Brain Res; 2005 Mar; 158(2):201-10. PubMed ID: 15698886
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Individual differences in activity predict locomotor activity and conditioned place preference to amphetamine in both adolescent and adult rats.
    Mathews IZ; Morrissey MD; McCormick CM
    Pharmacol Biochem Behav; 2010 Mar; 95(1):63-71. PubMed ID: 20006968
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Age and sex differences in the locomotor effect of repeated methylphenidate in rats classified as high or low novelty responders.
    Wooters TE; Dwoskin LP; Bardo MT
    Psychopharmacology (Berl); 2006 Sep; 188(1):18-27. PubMed ID: 16896959
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Locomotor response to novelty does not predict cocaine place preference conditioning in rats.
    Gong W; Neill DB; Justice JB
    Pharmacol Biochem Behav; 1996 Jan; 53(1):191-6. PubMed ID: 8848450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Susceptibility to amphetamine-induced place preference is predicted by locomotor response to novelty and amphetamine in the mouse.
    Orsini C; Buchini F; Piazza PV; Puglisi-Allegra S; Cabib S
    Psychopharmacology (Berl); 2004 Mar; 172(3):264-70. PubMed ID: 14600800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.