If reward-associated cues acquire the properties of incentive stimuli they can come to powerfully control behavior, and potentially promote maladaptive behavior. Pavlovian incentive stimuli are defined as stimuli that have three fundamental properties: they are attractive, they are themselves desired, and they can spur instrumental actions. We have found, however, that there is considerable individual variation in the extent to which animals attribute Pavlovian incentive motivational properties (“incentive salience”) to reward cues. The purpose of this paper was to develop criteria for identifying and classifying individuals based on their propensity to attribute incentive salience to reward cues. To do this, we conducted a meta-analysis of a large sample of rats (N = 1,878) subjected to a classic Pavlovian conditioning procedure. We then used the propensity of animals to approach a cue predictive of reward (one index of the extent to which the cue was attributed with incentive salience), to characterize two behavioral phenotypes in this population: animals that approached the cue (“sign-trackers”) vs. others that approached the location of reward delivery (“goal-trackers”). This variation in Pavlovian approach behavior predicted other behavioral indices of the propensity to attribute incentive salience to reward cues. Thus, the procedures reported here should be useful for making comparisons across studies and for assessing individual variation in incentive salience attribution in small samples of the population, or even for classifying single animals.

Some rats (sign-trackers, ST) are especially prone to attribute incentive salience to reward cues, relative to others (goal-trackers, GT). Thus, reward cues are more likely to promote maladaptive reward-seeking behavior in ST than GT. Here, we asked whether ST and GT differ on another trait that can contribute to poor restraint over behavior evoked by reward cues. We report that, relative to GT, ST have poor control over attentional performance, due in part to insufficient cholinergic stimulation of cortical circuitry. We found that, relative to GT, ST showed poor performance on a sustained attention task (SAT). Furthermore, their performance fluctuated rapidly between periods of good to near-chance performance. This finding was reproduced using a separate cohort of rats. As demonstrated earlier, performance on the SAT was associated with increases in extracellular levels of cortical acetylcholine (ACh); however, SAT performance-associated increases in ACh levels were significantly attenuated in ST relative to GT. Consistent with the view that the modulatory effects of ACh involves stimulation of α4β2* nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs), systemic administration of the partial nAChR agonist ABT-089 improved SAT performance in ST and abolished the difference between SAT-associated ACh levels in ST and GT. Neither the nonselective nAChR agonist nicotine nor the psychostimulant amphetamine improved SAT performance. These findings suggest that individuals who have a propensity to attribute high incentive salience to reward cues also exhibit relatively poor attentional control. A combination of these traits may render individuals especially vulnerable to disorders such as obesity and addiction.

Even when trained under exactly the same conditions outbred male Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats vary in the form of the Pavlovian conditioned approach response (CR) they acquire. The form of the CR (i.e. sign-tracking vs. goal-tracking) predicts to what degree individuals attribute incentive salience to cues associated with food or drugs. However, we have noticed variation in the incidence of these two phenotypes in rats obtained from different vendors. In this study, we quantified sign- and goal-tracking behavior in a reasonably large sample of SD rats obtained from two vendors (Harlan or Charles River), as well as from individual colonies operated by both vendors. Our sample of rats acquired from Harlan had, on average, more sign-trackers than goal-trackers, and vice versa for our sample of rats acquired from Charles River. Furthermore, there were significant differences among colonies of the same vendor. Although it is impossible to rule out environmental variables, SD rats at different vendors and barriers may have reduced phenotypic heterogeneity as a result of genetic variables, such as random genetic drift or population bottlenecks. Consistent with this hypothesis, we identified marked population structure among colonies from Harlan. Therefore, despite sharing the same name, investigators should be aware that important genetic and phenotypic differences exist among SD rats from different vendors or even from different colonies of the same vendor. If used judiciously this can be an asset to experimental design, but it can also be a pitfall for those unaware of the issue.

There is considerable individual variation in the extent to which food- and drug-associated cues (conditioned stimuli, CSs) acquire incentive salience, as indicated by whether they elicit approach towards them, and/or act as conditioned reinforcers. Here we asked whether this variation is influenced by properties of the CS itself. In rats, we assessed both the attractiveness and conditioned reinforcing properties of two CSs: a manipulable lever CS versus an auditory (tone) CS. There was considerable individual variation in the extent to which a lever CS acquired incentive motivational properties, as indicated by whether it became attractive (evoked a sign-tracking or goal-tracking conditioned response) or acted as a conditioned reinforcer. However, with a tone CS all rats learned a goal-tracking response, and the tone CS was an equally effective conditioned reinforcer in sign-trackers and goal-trackers. Even when presented in compound (a lever-tone CS), the two elements of the compound differentially acquired motivational properties. In contrast, amphetamine and stress potentiated the conditioned reinforcing properties of both visual and auditory CSs similarly in rats that primarily sign-tracked or goal-tracked. We conclude that variation in the to the ability of CSs to acquire incentive salience, and thus their ability to act as incentive stimuli capable of motivating behavior, is determined in part by properties of the CS itself.

Rationale Individuals vary considerably in the extent to which they attribute incentive salience to food-associated cues. Objectives We asked whether individuals prone to attribute incentive salience to a food cue are also prone to attribute incentive properties to a stimulus associated with a drug of abuse - cocaine. Methods We first identified those rats that attributed incentive salience to a food cue by quantifying the extent to which they came to approach and engage a food cue. We then used a conditioned place preference procedure to pair an injection of 10 mg/kg cocaine (i.p.) with one distinct floor texture (grid or holes) and saline with another. Following 8 days of conditioning, each rat was given a saline injection and placed into a chamber that had both floors present. We measured the time spent on each floor, and also 50-kHz ultrasonic vocalizations, which have been associated with positive affective states. Results Rats that vigorously engaged the food cue (“sign-trackers”) expressed a preference for the cocaine-paired floor, compared to those that did not (“goal-trackers”). In addition, sign-trackers made substantially more frequency modulated 50-kHz vocalizations when injected with cocaine and when later exposed to the cocaine cue. Conclusions Rats prone to attribute incentive salience to a food cue are also prone to attribute incentive motivational properties to a tactile cue associated with cocaine. We suggest that individuals prone to attribute incentive salience to reward cues will have difficulty resisting them, and therefore, may be especially vulnerable to develop impulse control disorders, including addiction.

Objective Obesity is influenced by genetic and environmental factors. Despite the success of human genome‐wide association studies, the specific genes that confer obesity remain largely unknown. The objective of this study was to use outbred rats to identify the genetic loci underlying obesity and related morphometric and metabolic traits. Methods This study measured obesity‐relevant traits, including body weight, body length, BMI, fasting glucose, and retroperitoneal, epididymal, and parametrial fat pad weight in 3,173 male and female adult N/NIH heterogeneous stock (HS) rats across three institutions, providing data for the largest rat genome‐wide association study to date. Genetic loci were identified using a linear mixed model to account for the complex family relationships of the HS and using covariates to account for differences among the three phenotyping centers. Results This study identified 32 independent loci, several of which contained only a single gene (e.g., Epha5, Nrg1, Klhl14) or obvious candidate genes (e.g., Adcy3, Prlhr). There were strong phenotypic and genetic correlations among obesity‐related traits, and there was extensive pleiotropy at individual loci. Conclusions This study demonstrates the utility of HS rats for investigating the genetics of obesity‐related traits across institutions and identify several candidate genes for future functional testing.

These studies suggest that both forms of pre-exposure reduced ethanol's aversive effect, but had no impact on ethanol's rewarding effect. In general, the detrimental effects of pre-exposure on CPA are explained best in terms of a reduction in ethanol's efficacy as an aversive unconditioned stimulus (i.e. tolerance), although explanations based on other types of associative interference are also possible. The failure to affect CPP with pre-exposure treatments that reduced or eliminated CPA suggests that these behaviors are mediated by independent, motivationally opposite effects of ethanol. Moreover, these results indicate dissociation between sensitization to ethanol's locomotor activating effect and changes in its rewarding effect. To the extent that motivational processes measured by CPP and CPA normally contribute to ethanol drinking, the present findings suggest that increases in ethanol intake seen after chronic ethanol exposure are more likely caused by tolerance to ethanol's aversive effect rather than sensitization to its rewarding or reinforcing effect.

No abstract