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.

No abstract

No abstract

Animals vary considerably in the degree to which they attribute incentive salience to cues predictive of reward. When a discrete cue (conditional stimulus) is repeatedly paired with delivery of a food reward (unconditional stimulus) only some rats (“sign-trackers”; STs) come to find the cue itself an attractive and desirable incentive stimulus. For other rats (“goal-trackers”; GTs) the cue is an effective conditional stimulus – it evokes a conditional response – but it is less attractive and less desirable. Given that STs have particular difficulty resisting reward cues, and are thought to have poor inhibitory control over their behavior, we hypothesized that they may also be more impulsive. There are, however, multiple forms of impulsivity; therefore, we compared STs and GTs on two tests of so-called impulsive action – a 2-choice serial reaction time task and a differential reinforcement of low rates of responding task, and one test of impulsive choice - a delay discounting choice procedure. We found that relative to GTs, STs were more impulsive on the two tests of impulsive action, but not on the test of impulsive choice. We speculate that when these two traits combine, that is, when an individual is not only prone to attribute incentive salience to reward cues but also prone to impulsive action, they may be especially susceptible to impulse control disorders, including 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.

Temporal sequences of sexual and maternal behaviors in female rats and their correlation with each other and with performance on a sensory-motor gating response inhibition task assessed by prepulse inhibition (PPI) were investigated following medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) lesions. Following excitotoxic mPFC (n = 10) or sham (n = 9) lesions, sexual behaviors across the ovarian cycle were scored. After mating and parturition, maternal interactions were scored until pups reached postnatal Day 10. After resumption of the ovarian cycle, the female rats were tested for PPI. Compared with sham lesions, mPFC lesions impaired proceptive behaviors and some maternal behaviors (e.g., pup retrieval, pup licking) but did not affect others (e.g., nest building, pup mouthing). Lesions disrupted temporal sequences of solicitations (number of male orientations followed, within 4 s, by a level change) and pup retrievals (number of pup retrievals followed, within 5 s, by another retrieval). These sequential behavior patterns were significantly correlated with each other and with PPI. However, when PPI effects were partialled out, group differences were less strong, but persisted. This study demonstrated that mPFC manipulations affect actions rich in sequential structure in response to biologically relevant stimuli.

Results show that the amphetamine-sensitized state impairs prefrontally mediated attentional set shifting. This is consistent with cognitive deficits in schizophrenia and addiction, and with the evidence that amphetamine sensitization is accompanied by functional changes in the mPFC. These results further add to a growing literature showing that activating D(1) receptors in the mPFC improves aspects of cognition.

Maternal and littermate (social) separation, through artificial rearing (AR), disrupts the development of subsequent maternal behavior and social learning in rats. The addition of maternal-licking-like stimulation during AR, partially reverses some of these effects. However, little is know about the role of social stimuli from littermates and nest odors during the preweaning period, in the development of the adult maternal behavior and social learning. The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of peer- and peer-and-odor rearing on the development of maternal behavior and social learning in rats. Female pups were reared with mothers (mother reared-MR) or without mothers (AR) from postnatal day (PND) 3. AR rats received three different treatments: (1) AR-CONTROL group received minimal tactile stimulation, (2) AR-ODOR females received exposure to maternal nest material inside the AR-isolation-cup environment, (3) AR-SOCIAL group was reared in the cup with maternal nest material and a conspecific of the same-age and same-sex and received additional tactile stimulation. MR females were reared by their mothers in the nest and with conspecifics. In adulthood, rats were tested for maternal behavior towards their own pups and in a social learning task. Results confirm our previous report that AR impairs performance of maternal behavior and the development of a social food preference. Furthermore, social cues from a littermate, in combination with tactile stimulation and the nest odor, reversed the negative effects of complete isolation (AR-CONTROL) on some of the above behaviors. Exposure to the odor alone also had effects on some of these olfactory-mediated behaviors. These studies indicate that social stimulation from littermates during the preweaning period, in combination with odor from the nest and tactile stimulation, contributes to the development of affiliative behaviors.