Amygdala ablation disrupts reinforcer "devaluation" in monkeys (Malkova et al., 1997). Here, we tested the hypothesis that transient inactivation of amygdala by the GABA A agonist muscimol (MUS), specifically during the period of reward satiation, would have a similar effect. Six pigtail macaques were trained on a visual object discrimination task in which 60 objects were associated with one of two specific food rewards. Subsequently, we evaluated the selective satiation-induced change (devaluation) in object preference in probe sessions. We also examined the effect of the amygdala inactivation during the probe sessions to determine whether the inactivation limited to the testing period (and not during the satiation period) is sufficient to impair the expression of reinforcer devaluation. MUS infusions were aimed at basolateral amygdala (BLA) in a pseudorandomized design; each monkey received MUS or saline either before or after selective satiation with each of the two food rewards (six infusions total). Under the control (saline) condition, the monkeys significantly shifted their preference from objects representing the sated food rewards to those representing the nonsated rewards (30% change). When BLA was inactivated during selective satiation (i.e., MUS infused before satiation), this devaluation effect was blocked. In contrast, MUS infusion after satiation, so that it was present just during the testing period, did not impair the shift in object preference (27% change). Thus, BLA is necessary for the appropriate registration of the change in the reinforcer value but not for the subsequent expression of the devaluation involving its transfer to secondary reinforcers.

The directionally opposite changes in REM suggest that stressor controllability is an important factor in the effects of stress and stressful memories on sleep.

Stimulation of the intermediate and deep layers of superior colliculus (DLSC) in rodents evokes both tracking/pursuit (approach) and avoidance/flight (defensive) responses (Dean et al., 1989). These two classes of response are subserved by distinct output projections associated with lateral (approach) and medial (defensive) DLSC (Comoli et al., 2012). In nonhuman primates, DLSC has been examined only with respect to orienting/approach behaviors, especially eye movements, however, defense-like behaviors have not been reported. Here we examined the profile of behavioral responses to the activation of DLSC by unilateral intracerebral infusions of the GABAA receptor antagonist, bicuculline methiodide (BIC), in nine freely moving macaques. Across animals, the most consistently evoked behavior was cowering (all animals), followed by increased vocalization and escape-like behaviors (seven animals), and attack of objects (three animals). The effects of BIC were dose-dependent within the range 2.5-14nmol (threshold dose of 4.6nmol). The behaviors and their latency to onset did not vary across different infusion sites within DLSC. Cowering and escape-like behaviors resembled the defense-like responses reported after DLSC stimulation in rats, but in the macaques these responses were evoked from both medial and lateral sites within DLSC. Our findings are unexpected in the context of an earlier theoretical perspective (Dean et al., 1989) that emphasized a preferential role of the primate DLSC for approach rather than defensive responses. Our data provide the first evidence for induction of defense-like behaviors by activation of DLSC in monkeys, suggesting that the role of DLSC in responding to threats is conserved across species.

Both hypoactivity and hyperactivity in the amygdala are associated with perturbations in social behavior. While Ͼ60 years of experimental manipulations of the amygdala in animal models have shown that amygdala is critical for social behavior, many of these studies contradict one another. Moreover, several questions remain unaddressed. (1) What effect does activation of amygdala have on social behavior? (2) What is the effect of transient silencing, rather than permanent damage? (3) Is there a dissociation between the roles of the central (CeA) and basolateral amygdala (BLA) in regulating social behavior? (4) Can the prosocial effects of amygdala manipulations be explained by anxiolytic effects? We focally manipulated activity within the CeA or BLA in macaques by intracerebral microinjection of muscimol (to inactivate) or bicuculline (to activate) to these amygdaloid subregions. Social interactions were observed in pairs of highly familiar monkeys. We compared these effects to those achieved with systemic diazepam. Activation of the BLA but not CeA suppressed social behavior. Inhibition of either structure increased social behavior, although the effect was greater following inhibition of the BLA. Systemic diazepam was without effect. These studies, which are the first to bidirectionally manipulate the primate amygdala for effects on social behavior, revealed that (1) the amygdala, as a critical regulator of the social network, is bidirectionally sensitive to perturbations in activity, and (2) increased sociability after amygdala inactivation cannot be solely explained by decreased fear.

Outbred Wistar rats can show significant individual differences in the effects of stress on REM that are mediated by BLA. These differences in REM can be independent of behavioral fear and the peripheral stress response, and may be an important biomarker of stress resilience and vulnerability.