Sex differences in behavioral responding and dopamine release during Pavlovian learning

Lefner, Merridee J.; Dejeux, Mariana I; Wanat, Matthew J.

doi:10.1101/2021.10.04.463059

Cited by 2 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Rats perform a greater number of head entries following the delivery of a large reward relative to the delivery of a small reward (Lefner et al, 2022). Flupenthixol administration during the Acquisition phase decreased Post US head entries for both trial types in the Pavlovian Reward Size task (Sessions 1-10 three-way mixed-effects analysis; treatment effect: F(1, 126) = 16.73, p < 0.0001; session x treatment effect: F(9, 126) = 2.11, p = 0.03; three-way interaction effect: F(9, 126) = 2.82, p = 0.005; Fig.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Training sessions for the Pavlovian Reward Rate task consisted of 50 trials where the termination of a 5 s audio cue (white noise or 4.5 kHz tone, counterbalanced across animals) resulted in the delivery of a single food pellet and illumination of the food port light for 4.5 s. Each session contained 25 High Rate trials in which the CS was presented after a 20 ± 5 s ITI, and 25 Low Rate trials in which the CS was presented after a 70 ± 5 s ITI, delivered in a pseudorandom order. Conditioned responding was quantified as the change in the rate of head entries during the 5 s CS relative to the 5 s preceding the CS delivery (Fonzi et al, 2017;Stelly et al, 2021;Lefner et al, 2022). We also quantified the latency to initiate a head entry during the CS.…”

Section: Behavioral Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…After the subject experiences multiple cue-reward pairings, the reward-evoked dopamine response decays and the cue-evoked dopamine response increases (Schultz et al, 1997;Day et al, 2007;Coddington and Dudman, 2018). In well-trained animals, dopamine neurons respond to cues to encode differences in reward-related information including reward size (Tobler et al, 2005;Roesch et al, 2007;Gan et al, 2010;Lefner et al, 2022), reward probability (Fiorillo et al, 2003;Hart et al, 2015), and reward rate (Fonzi et al, 2017;Stelly et al, 2021). However our recent work demonstrates that cue-evoked dopamine release does not signal differences in reward value during early training sessions, though these value signals emerge after extended training (Fonzi et al, 2017;Stelly et al, 2021;Lefner et al, 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this study, we trained separate groups of rats on two different Pavlovian tasks that elicit goal-tracking behavior. In the Pavlovian Reward Size task, two distinct audio cues signaled the delivery of either a small reward or a large reward (Lefner et al, 2022). In the Pavlovian Reward Rate task, two distinct audio cues both signaled the delivery of a small reward but differed in the time elapsed since the previous reward delivery (i.e.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In well-trained animals, dopamine neurons respond to cues to encode differences in reward-related information including reward size (Tobler et al, 2005;Roesch et al, 2007;Gan et al, 2010;Lefner et al, 2022), reward probability (Fiorillo et al, 2003;Hart et al, 2015), and reward rate (Fonzi et al, 2017;Stelly et al, 2021). However our recent work demonstrates that cue-evoked dopamine release does not signal differences in reward value during early training sessions, though these value signals emerge after extended training (Fonzi et al, 2017;Stelly et al, 2021;Lefner et al, 2022). These findings suggest that the dopamine system may differentially regulate behavioral responding depending on whether the subject is learning the task or is well-trained.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Critical periods in which dopamine exerts control over behavioral responding during Pavlovian learning

Lefner

Stelly

Zurita

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Learning the association between rewards and predictive cues is critical for appetitive behavioral responding. The mesolimbic dopamine system is thought to play an integral role in establishing these cue-reward associations. The dopamine response to cues can signal differences in reward value, though this emerges only after significant training. This suggests that the dopamine system may differentially regulate behavioral responding depending on the phase of training. To address this, separate groups of male rats were trained on Pavlovian tasks in which distinct audio cues signaled either differences in reward size or differences in reward rate. The dopamine receptor antagonist flupenthixol was systemically administered prior to either the first ten sessions of training (acquisition phase) or the second ten sessions of training (expression phase) and we monitored the effect of these manipulations for an additional ten training sessions. We identified acute effects of dopamine receptor antagonism on conditioned responding, the latency to respond, and post-reward head entries in both Pavlovian tasks. Interestingly, dopamine receptor antagonism during the expression phase produced persistent deficits in behavioral responding only in rats trained on the reward size Pavlovian task. Together, our results illustrate that dopamine's control over behavior in Pavlovian tasks depends upon one's prior training experience and the information signaled by the cues.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Behavioral Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Critical periods in which dopamine exerts control over behavioral responding during Pavlovian learning

Lefner

Stelly

Zurita

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Sex differences in learning and performing the Go/NoGo tasks

Zhang

Wang

et al. 2023

Biol Sex Differ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The quality of learning and post-learning performances is critical for daily life. The behavioral flexibility is equally important for adapting the changing circumstances. The learning process requires repeated practices, which enhances prompt and proper behavioral responses, in turn, which promotes habits formation as well. Despite the well-documented sex differences in learning and performances, contradictory results were reported. A possible cause might be a systematic analysis due to specific research interests, regardless of the continuity of natural acquisition process. Here, we investigate the potential sex differences in learning, performances and adjustments of habited behaviors with regular and reversal Go/NoGo tasks. Methods Both male and female Sprague-Dawley rats were used in this study. All rats were trained for a regular rodent Go/NoGo task and a subset of rats were trained for a reversal rodent Go/NoGo task, both with strict elimination criteria. The behavioral performance data were stored in PC for off-line analysis. Multiple behavioral indices were analyzed for both passed and retired rats. Results The ability of learning the regular the reversal Go/NoGo tasks was similar for both male and female rats, however, the female rats took longer time to master the task principles in later stages for both tasks. In the regular Go/NoGo task, the female rats spent more time on completing the trial in performance optimization phases, which implied female rats were more cautious than male rats. Along with the progression of training, both male and female rats developed Go-preference strategies to perform the regular Go/NoGo task, which induced failure to meet the setting success criteria. The retired male rats exhibited shorter RTs and MTs than the retired female rats after developing Go-preference. Moreover, the time needed to complete the Go trials was significantly prolonged for male rats in the reversal Go/NoGo task. Conclusions Overall, we conclude that distinctive strategies were employed in performing Go/NoGo tasks for both male and female rats. Male rats required less time to stabilize the performance in behavioral optimization phase. In addition, male rats were more accurate in estimating time elapsing. In contrast, female rats took more cautious considerations in performing the task, through which minimal influences were manifested in the reversal version of task.

show abstract

Sex differences in behavioral responding and dopamine release during Pavlovian learning

Cited by 2 publications

References 54 publications

Critical periods in which dopamine exerts control over behavioral responding during Pavlovian learning

Critical periods in which dopamine exerts control over behavioral responding during Pavlovian learning

Sex differences in learning and performing the Go/NoGo tasks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About