Segregation of Amphetamine Reward and Locomotor Stimulation between Nucleus Accumbens Medial Shell and Core
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Convergent evidence suggests that amphetamine (AMPH) exerts its rewarding and locomotor stimulating effects via release of dopamine in the nucleus accumbens. However, there is no consensus as to the relative contributions of core and medial shell subregions to these effects. Moreover, the literature is based primarily on intracranial administration, which cannot fully mimic the drug distribution achieved by systemic administration. In the present study, the effects of bilateral 6-hydroxydopamine lesions of the accumbens core or medial shell on rewarding and locomotor stimulating effects of systemically administered amphetamine (0.75 mg/kg, i.p.) were examined in a conditioned place preference (CPP) procedure relying solely on tactile cues (floor texture). Residual dopamine innervation was quantified by [125I]-RTI-55 binding to the dopamine transporter. When lesions were performed before the conditioning phase, AMPH-induced locomotor stimulation and CPP magnitude were positively correlated with residual dopamine transporter binding in core and medial shell, respectively. Medial shell lesions did not affect morphine CPP, arguing that a sensory or mnemonic deficit was not responsible for the lesion-induced reduction in AMPH CPP. Medial shell lesions performed between the conditioning phase and the test day reduced the expression of amphetamine CPP. These results suggest that after systemic amphetamine administration, rewarding and locomotor stimulating effects of the drug are anatomically dissociated within the nucleus accumbens: the medial shell contributes to rewarding effects, whereas the core contributes to behavioral activation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".