Plants - Drugs Mind - Spirit Freedom - Law Arts - Culture Library  
Erowid References Database
Glennon RA, Misenheimer BR. 
“Stimulus effects of N-monoethyl-1-(3,4-methylenedioxyphenyl)-2-aminopropane (MDE) and N-hydroxy-1-(3,4-methylenedioxyphenyl)-2-aminopropane (N-OH MDA) in rats trained to discriminate MDMA from saline”. 
Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 1989 Aug 06;33(4):909-12.
Tests of stimulus generalization were conducted using rats trained to discriminate 1.5 mg/kg of N-monomethyl-1-(3,4-methylenedioxyphenyl)-2-aminopropane HCl (MDMA) from saline in order to determine if two structurally related analogs (MDE and N-OH MDA) would produce similar stimulus effects. The MDMA-stimulus (MDMA, ED50 value = 0.76 mg/kg) generalized both to MDE (ED50 value = 0.73 mg/kg) and N-OH MDA (ED50 value = 0.47 mg/kg). Administration of (+)amphetamine resulted in partial generalization (maximum of 49% MDMA-appropriate responding) in the MDMA-trained animals. Taken together with our previous studies showing that MDMA substitutes for the phenylisopropylamine stimulant (+)amphetamine, but that neither MDE nor N-OH MDA substitute for (+)amphetamine or for the phenylisopropylamine hallucinogen 1-(2,5-dimethoxy-4-methylphenyl)-2-aminopropane (DOM), the present results [i.e., MDMA-stimulus generalization to MDE, N-OH MDA, but not to (+)amphetamine] suggest that 1) MDMA produces effects other than those that may be considered amphetamine-like, and 2) MDE and N-OH MDA are MDMA-like agents with even less of an amphetamine-like component of action than MDMA itself.
Comments and Responses to this Article
Submit Comment
[ Cite HTML ]