Sign-tracking rats show heightened sensitivity to food- and drug-associated cues, which serve as strong incentives for driving reward seeking. We hypothesized that this enhanced incentive drive is accompanied by an inflexibility when incentive value changes. To examine this we tested rats in Pavlovian outcome devaluation or second-order conditioning prior to the assessment of sign-tracking tendency. To assess behavioral flexibility we trained rats to associate a light with a food outcome. After the food was devalued by pairing with illness, we measured conditioned responding (CR) to the light during an outcome devaluation probe test. The level of CR during outcome devaluation probe test correlated with the rats' subsequent tracking tendency, with sign-tracking rats failing to suppress CR to the light after outcome devaluation. To assess Pavlovian incentive learning, we trained rats on first-order (CS+, CS−) and second-order (SOCS+, SOCS−) discriminations. After second-order conditioning, we measured CR to the second-order cues during a probe test. Second-order conditioning was observed across all rats regardless of tracking tendency. The behavioral inflexibility of sign-trackers has potential relevance for understanding individual variation in vulnerability to drug addiction.

Phasic activity of midbrain dopamine neurons is currently thought to encapsulate the prediction-error signal described in Sutton and Barto’s (1981) model-free reinforcement learning algorithm. This phasic signal is thought to contain information about the quantitative value of reward, which transfers to the reward-predictive cue after learning. This is argued to endow the reward-predictive cue with the value inherent in the reward, motivating behavior toward cues signaling the presence of reward. Yet theoretical and empirical research has implicated prediction-error signaling in learning that extends far beyond a transfer of quantitative value to a reward-predictive cue. Here, we review the research which demonstrates the complexity of how dopaminergic prediction errors facilitate learning. After briefly discussing the literature demonstrating that phasic dopaminergic signals can act in the manner described by Sutton and Barto (1981), we consider how these signals may also influence attentional processing across multiple attentional systems in distinct brain circuits. Then, we discuss how prediction errors encode and promote the development of context-specific associations between cues and rewards. Finally, we consider recent evidence that shows dopaminergic activity contains information about causal relationships between cues and rewards that reflect information garnered from rich associative models of the world that can be adapted in the absence of direct experience. In discussing this research we hope to support the expansion of how dopaminergic prediction errors are thought to contribute to the learning process beyond the traditional concept of transferring quantitative value.

The existence of value coding and salience coding neurons in the mammalian brain, including in habenula and ventral tegmental area, has sparked considerable interest in the interactions that occur between Pavlovian appetitive and aversive conditioning. Here we studied these appetitive-aversive interactions at the behavioral level by assessing the learning that occurs when a Pavlovian appetitive conditioned stimulus (conditional stimulus, CS) serves as a CS for shock in Pavlovian fear conditioning. A Pavlovian appetitive CS was retarded in the rate at which it could be transformed into a fear CS (counterconditioning), but the presence of the appetitive CS augmented fear learning to a concurrently presented neutral CS (superconditioning). Retardation of fear learning was not alleviated by manipulations designed to restore the associability of the appetitive CS before fear conditioning but was alleviated by manipulations designed to increase the aversive quality of the shock unconditioned stimulus (US). These findings are consistent with opponent interactions between the appetitive and aversive motivational systems and provide a behavioral approach for assessing the neural correlates of these appetitive-aversive interactions.

No abstract

Further examination of the molecular regulators of long-term calorie restriction (CR), reported to have an anxiolytic effect, may highlight novel therapeutic targets for anxiety disorders. Here, adult male Hooded Wistar rats were exposed to a 25% CR whilst anxiety-like behaviour was assessed at 6-, 12-, and 18-months of age via the elevated plus maze, open field, and acoustic startle tests. Next-generation sequencing was then used to measure transcriptome-wide gene expression in the hypothalamus, amygdala, pituitary, and adrenal glands. Results showed an anxiolytic behavioural profile across early, middle, and late adulthood by CR, with the strongest effects noted at 6-months. Transcriptomic analysis by seven attribute weighting algorithms, including Info Gain Ratio, Rule, Chi Squared, Gini Index, Uncertainty, Relief, and Info Gain, led to the development of a signature of long-term CR, independent of region. Complement C1q A chain (C1qa), an extracellular protein, expression was significantly decreased by CR in most regions examined. Furthermore, text mining highlighted the positive involvement of C1qa in anxiety, depression, neurodegeneration, stress, and ageing, collectively identifying a suitable biomarker candidate for CR. Overall, the current study identified anxiety-related phenotypic changes and a novel transcriptome signature of long-term CR, indicating potential therapeutic targets for anxiety, depression, and neurodegeneration.

Together, our results suggest that CB1 signaling mediates two critical properties of incentive stimuli; their ability to attract (Exp. 1) and their ability to reinforce (Exp. 2) behavior.

We used Pavlovian counterconditioning in rats to identify the neural mechanisms for appetitive -aversive motivational interactions. In Stage I, rats were trained on conditioned stimulus (CS) -food (unconditioned stimulus [US]) pairings. In Stage II, this appetitive CS was transformed into a fear CS via pairings with footshock. The development of fear responses was retarded in rats that had received Stage I appetitive training. This counterconditioning was associated with increased levels of phosphorylated mitogen activated protein kinase immunoreactivity (pMAPK-IR) in several brain regions, including midline thalamus, rostral agranular insular cortex (RAIC), lateral amygdala, and nucleus accumbens core and shell, but decreased expression in the ventrolateral quadrant of the midbrain periaqueductal gray. These brain regions showing differential pMAPK-IR have previously been identified as part of the fear prediction error circuit. We then examined the causal role of RAIC MAPK in fear learning and showed that Stage II fear learning was prevented by RAIC infusions of the MEK inhibitor PD098059 (0.5 mg/hemisphere). Taken together, these results show that there are opponent interactions between the appetitive and aversive motivational systems during fear learning and that the transformation of a reward CS into a fear CS is linked to heightened activity in the fear prediction error circuit.

Previously established individual differences in appetitive approach and devaluation sensitivity observed in goal- and sign-trackers may be attributed to differences in the acquisition, modification, or use of associative information in basolateral amygdala (BLA) pathways. Here, we sought to determine the extent to which communication of associative information between BLA and anterior portions of insular cortex (IC) supports ongoing Pavlovian conditioned approach behaviors in sign- and goal-tracking rats, in the absence of manipulations to outcome value. We hypothesized that the BLA mediates goal-, but not sign- tracking approach through interactions with the IC, a brain region involved in supporting flexible behavior. We first trained rats in Pavlovian lever autoshaping to determine their sign- or goal-tracking tendency. During alternating test sessions, we gave unilateral intracranial injections of vehicle or a cocktail of gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptor agonists, baclofen and muscimol, unilaterally into the BLA and contralaterally or ipsilaterally into the IC prior to reinforced lever autoshaping sessions. Consistent with our hypothesis we found that contralateral inactivation of BLA and IC increased the latency to approach the food cup and decreased the number of food cup contacts in goal-trackers. While contralateral inactivation of BLA and IC did not affect the total number of lever contacts in sign-trackers, this manipulation increased the latency to approach the lever. Ipsilateral inactivation of BLA and IC did not impact approach behaviors in Pavlovian lever autoshaping. These findings, contrary to our hypothesis, suggest that communication between BLA and IC maintains a representation of initially learned appetitive associations that commonly support the initiation of Pavlovian conditioned approach behavior regardless of whether it is directed at the cue or the location of reward delivery.