Differential effects of unilateral dorsal hindbrain lesions on hypothalamic self-stimulation in the rat

Farber, Jorge; Ellman, Steven J.; Mattiace, Linda A.; Holtzman, Alex; Ippolito, Paula M.; Halperin, Ronnie; Steiner, Solomon S.

doi:10.1016/0006-8993(76)90342-5

Cited by 20 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Antelman and Caggiula (1977) have suggested that a variety of behaviors (including ICSS) in an aroused animal are facilitated by the suppression of NE and/or the enhancement of DA systems. Although their model uniquely explains reports of enhanced ICSS after locus coeruleus lesions (Farber, Ellman, Mattiace, Holtzman, Ippolito, Halperin, & Steiner, 1976;Koob, Balcom, & Meyerhoff, 1976), it fails to accommodate a large portion of pharmacological data (see above).…”

Section: Neurotransmitter Theories Of Icssmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Physiological Mechanisms of Motivation

Pfaff¹

1982

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Neurotransmitter Theories Of Icssmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Physiological Mechanisms of Motivation

Pfaff¹

1982

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Animals were placed into one of two groups on the basis of the location of their HYP electrode. The first group comprised tho se HYP sites (crus cerebrilfields of Forel) which showed reduced ICSS response rates following LC lesions (Farber et al, 1976). The second group comprised those HYP sites (MFB/perifor ical area) which showed unaltered ICSS response rates following LC lesions (Farber et al , 1976).…”

Section: Self-stimulation Interactions 271mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Rat67gmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If initial stimulation of the LC is necessary for optimal summation in ICSS interactions, this suggests that tonic LC activation may be necessary for DFLH ICSS and explain the reduction or abolition of DFLH following LC lesions (Farber et al, 1976). The complement of such an explanation is feasible, since the LC and MFB produce reciprocal and similar interactions, while LC lesions do not attenuate MFB ICSS (Farber et al, 1976;Koob et al, 1976). Indeed, the occasional asymmetry in which response rates are higher in LC-MFB interactions when the MFB is stimulated initially agrees with the observations that MFB lesions attenuate dorsal noradrenergic bundle ICSS (Clavier & Routtenberg, 1976).…”

Section: Rat67gmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A recent study (Farber, Ellman, Mattiace, Holtzman, Ippolito, Halperin, & Steiner, 1976) showed that unilateral LC lesions selectively reduced or abolished ICSS elicited from ipsilateral crus cerebri or fields of Forel HYP electrode placements, while sparing or facilitating MFB or perifornical ICSS. This latter result has also been reported elsewhere (Koob, Balcom, & Meyerhoff, 1976).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Differential locus coeruleus and hypothalamic self-stimulation interactions

Bodnar¹,

Ellman

Coons

et al. 1979

Psychobiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To ascertain the nature of intracranial self-stimulation (ICSS) interactions between locus coeruleus (LC) and various hypothalamic (HYP) sites, rats were tested with monophasic pulse pair stimulation. When trains of pulse pairs were delivered to a single ICSS site , lower responding occurred at short pulse-pair intervals. However, when the pulses of each pulse pair were split between LC and HYP ICSS sites, response rates at all pulse-pair intervals were elevated well above single-pulse responding, indicating a neurophysiological interaction between these loci. The symmetry of LC and HYP interactions depended upon the HYP electrode placement. Both internal capsule and fields of Forel placements produced asymmetrical LC·HYP interactions in which higher ICSS rates occurred when the LC received the first pulse of each pair than when it received the second pulse of each pair, suggesting a direct, and possibly modulating, influence of the LC upon these HYP placements. Both medial forebrain bundle and perifornical HYP placements produced symmetrical LC·HYP interactions in which similar ICSS rates occurred regardless of site stimulation order, suggesting an indirect, reciprocal influence between the LC and these HYP placements.Theories of intracranial self-stimulation (lCSS) behavior have often questioned whether the many discrete rreuroanatomical loci throughout the brain which subserve the behavior are linked to form an integrated "reward" system or if these loci are independent of one another and only share the common property of ICSS. Among the many means of ascertaining whether ICSS loci form an integrated system is to determine whether stimulation delivered to pairs of ICSS sites will summate and cause increased lCSS responding. Previous studies demonstrated that response rates elicited under simultaneous or nearsimultaneous stimulation of two ICSS sites were significantly greater than the sum of the response rates elicited when each of the sites was stimulated singly, suggesting that a behavioral interaction between the Data collection and analy sis was supported by a CCNY Faculty

show abstract

Brain-Stimulated Reward and Control of Autonomic Function: Are They Related?

Halperin¹,

Pfaff²

1982

The Physiological Mechanisms of Motivation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Differential effects of unilateral dorsal hindbrain lesions on hypothalamic self-stimulation in the rat

Cited by 20 publications

References 21 publications

The Physiological Mechanisms of Motivation

The Physiological Mechanisms of Motivation

Differential locus coeruleus and hypothalamic self-stimulation interactions

Brain-Stimulated Reward and Control of Autonomic Function: Are They Related?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About