So, if I'm bot mistaken, you need protocols for:

- rat behavioral studies

- histology & immunohistochemistry

- cell signalling studies

For the rat behavioral studies, you need memory&recognition studies or other ones?

http://www.ufrgs.br/ppgneuro/artigos/1_QuillfeldtJA_BehavMethodsLearn&Memory2006.pdf

For histology & immunohistochemistry, see the link below:

http://www.cellsignal.com/support/protocols/IHC_Paraffin.html

For presynaptic & postsynaptic protein detection studies, see the link below:

http://www.nature.com/nprot/journal/v1/n4/full/nprot.2006.265.html

I wish it was helpful.

Best regards

If you have any problems with access to files, please state so, for us to help you.

Hi

There are lot of studies related with benefits of phyto products and brain health.

The main thing you can do is to do the literature survey and collect the info. Choose based on the available resource in your working condition. The link sent by Elbay also useful

In drug studies, the study of a psychoactive compound does not make it automatically "substance abuse research". It may well belong to the discipline of traditional ethnopharmacology. Furthermore, animal/receptor studies of a novel compound, for a potential medicinal purpose, have nothing to do with problem use of that compound in a marginal group of humans.

You talk about a "plant" - but have you already isolated and identified some putatively active compounds (perhaps alkaloids) from that plant? The chemical structure of those compounds may give useful hints about their possible neuropharmacological mechanisms. Maybe you have just another plant source of, say, cathinones, for which you don't have to do the studies that have been already made before with those particular compounds. Chances are little that you will find a novel plant-based compound, but if you still do, you would need to isolate and identify it anyway (an important step that you did not explicitly mention). Good luck with your research!

@Elbay thanks alot bro. I would always get across to you for files.

@Mohamed am very grateful .

@Levente thanks for d advise .I would get back to u

No problem at all, @Ridwan. I am always standing besides science, and try to help people who work for it.

You might start by pulling the following journal articles, and note the key words for an academic database search, specifically for finding additional accepted methodological approaches and protocols for assessing the effects of psycho-stimulants on the neuro-anatomy and behavioral measures in rodents:

Achat-Mendes C, Anderson KL, Itzhak Y. Impairment in consolidation of learned place preference following dopaminergic neurotoxicity in mice is ameliorated by N-acetylcysteine but not D1 and D2 dopamine receptor agonists. Neuropsychopharmacology 2007;32(3):531–541. [PubMed:16760923]

Bolanos CA, Glatt SJ, Jackson D. Subsensitivity to dopaminergic drugs in periadolescent rats: a behavioral and neurochemical analysis. Brain Res Dev Brain Res Nov 1;1998 111(1):25–33.

Kalsbeek A, Voorn P, Buijs RM, Pool CW, Uylings HB. Development of the dopaminergic innervation in the prefrontal cortex of the rat. J Comp Neurol Mar 1;1988 269(1):58–72. [PubMed:3361004]

Saphier D, Feldman S. Effects of neural stimuli on paraventricular nucleus neurones. Brain Res Bull May;1985 14(5):401–407. [PubMed: 4027687]

Wu PH, Shen YC, Wang YH, Chi CW, Yen JC. Baicalein attenuates methamphetamine-induced loss of dopamine transporter in mouse striatum. Toxicology 2006;226(2−3):238–245. [PubMed:16887252]

And to Levente Moro: "... problem use of that compound in a marginal group of humans." The latest us survey by SAMHSA indicates that nearly 23 Million individuals in the U.S. over age 12 had personally suffered from substance abuse or dependence within the previous 12 months of the study. The only reason for the marginalization of those who suffer from such conditions on the continuum of substance use, is due to the mistaken attitude expressed by roughly 33% of U.S. citizens, that "it (abuse/addiction) is simply a matter of choice." When in fact it is not a matter of choice, it is a real medical condition with genetic, biological, neurological, sociological underpinnings.

You illustrate the reality that even highly educated individuals do not realize the pervasiveness of Addiction in society, which is anything but marginal. John Dupuy, a noted Addiction Treatment Practitioner and outspoken supporter for an urgent shift in Public Policy approach to fighting the disease states, ""Addiction is the fifth horseman of the Apocalypse (the first four horsemen represent Conquest, War, Famine and Death) It is one of the most intractable cataclysmic problems facing our world and our peoples."

Substance Abuse and Addiction represent a National Healthcare Crisis that demands a significant paradigm shift, that treats as opposed to incarcerates individuals with a medical illness!

@Alan: Yes, Master, please educate us more about reality and society :)

Mr. Moro, sarcasm is petty and unwarranted. Perhaps I should have added that I entirely agree with your statement pointing out that studying the psychoactive effects of a compound does not inherently equate to research on the issue of substance abuse. But I think you would agree that greater specificity regarding what I believe you meant by using the term marginal; that the rate of addiction to psycho-actives when compared to the rate of their use is not as dramatic as many politicians and governments would have the populous believe.

And, while I admit your R.G. score is far superior to mine... what is relevant to the veracity of my statement happens to be backed by actual data. I should add that I am not addressing this issue regarding any country other than the U.S., because the U.S. government's current approach to the problem of addiction (prohibition and incarceration-for illicit substances has proven a 40 year long exercise in failure). And is coupled with the duplicity of allowing for legalization of two psychoactive substances that are actually worse that illicit schedule 1 psychoactive drugs: more addictive than heroin (tobacco) and more damaging to every human organ, system and tissue in the body (alcohol) than any other legal or illegal drug of recreational use. But, perhaps you actually interpret the following numbers as "marginal" and have no issue with the fact that nearly 90% of people in need of treatment (in the U.S.) did not receive it (20.5 million human beings in need):

(Source:http://samhsa.gov/data/NSDUH/2k10ResultsRev/NSDUHresultsRev2010.htm#C.1)

...additional data from the same report:

-In 2010, 23.1 million persons aged 12 or older needed treatment for an illicit drug or alcohol use problem (9.1 percent of persons aged 12 or older). Of these, 2.6 million (1.0 percent of persons aged 12 or older and 11.2 percent of those who needed treatment) received treatment at a specialty facility. Thus, 20.5 million persons (8.1 percent of the population aged 12 or older) needed treatment for an illicit drug or alcohol use problem but did not receive treatment at a specialty facility in the past year.

•In 2010, an estimated 22.1 million persons (8.7 percent of the population aged 12 or older) were classified with substance dependence or abuse in the past year based on criteria specified in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition (DSM-IV). Of these, 2.9 million were classified with dependence or abuse of both alcohol and illicit drugs, 4.2 million had dependence or abuse of illicit drugs but not alcohol, and 15.0 million had dependence or abuse of alcohol but not illicit drugs.

•In 2010, an estimated 22.6 million Americans aged 12 or older were current (past month) illicit drug users, meaning they had used an illicit drug during the month prior to the survey interview. This estimate represents 8.9 percent of the population aged 12 or older. Illicit drugs include marijuana/hashish, cocaine (including crack), heroin, hallucinogens, inhalants, or prescription-type psychotherapeutics used nonmedically

•In 2010, nearly one quarter (23.1 percent) of persons aged 12 or older participated in binge drinking. This translates to about 58.6 million people. The rate in 2010 was similar to the estimate in 2009 (23.7 percent). Binge drinking is defined as having five or more drinks on the same occasion on at least 1 day in the 30 days prior to the survey.

•In 2010, heavy drinking was reported by 6.7 percent of the population aged 12 or older, or 16.9 million people. This rate was similar to the rate of heavy drinking in 2009 (6.8 percent). Heavy drinking is defined as binge drinking on at least 5 days in the past 30 days.

•In 2010, an estimated 69.6 million Americans aged 12 or older were current (past month) users of a tobacco product. This represents 27.4 percent of the population in that age range. In addition, 58.3 million persons (23.0 percent of the population) were current cigarette smokers; 13.2 million (5.2 percent) smoked cigars; 8.9 million (3.5 percent) used smokeless tobacco; and 2.2 million (0.8 percent) smoked tobacco in pipes.

The U.S. must change its approach to treating Addiction; that is the advocacy perspective from which I was expressing my original reply to your words. I apologize for any appearance of an indictment of your character of knowledge/awareness. I quickly looked at some or your published work, and believe we likely have more similarities than differences regarding the entire issue of the use of psychoactive substances.

My sincerest apologies for any offense I may have made!

Alan

@Alan thanks for the articles can u pls help me get them cos I don't have access to journals like psycho pharmacology.

@ Alan and Moro both of you are right we all know our youths are experimenting alots of substance. No beefing please.

Thanks alot guys

@Alan: After reading your writings, I also think that you and me are on the same side, struggling for the medical use of psychoactive substances for addiction treatment (also for harm reduction, and drug policy changes). My point to Ridwan was that drug use per se is never equal to drug abuse, and that one may do psychoactive substance research without a need to claim that it is related to substance abuse. This is justified because despite large numbers of problematic substance users, there are always much larger numbers of non-problematic substance users -- no matter which substance is in question. Indeed, there are great differences between different substances -- this is a reason why alcohol should NOT be grouped with other drugs in statistics, and why "illicit drugs" should NOT be grouped together at all. These purposeful groupings just add fuel for the drug war, and hinder the application of, say, LSD or ibogaine (both being non-addictive "illicit drugs") for addiction treatment. Paradoxically, tobacco/nicotine use is rarely called "abuse" or "misuse", as if legality were an excluding condition in establishing addiction problems. I am happy that we both share a view on psychedelics as promising treatment options for addictions, and I do promote online academic debating on these topics. All the best!