Opposing roles of prelimbic and infralimbic dopamine in conditioned cue and place preference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: Increasing evidence points to the prelimbic (PL) and infralimbic (IL) cortices of the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) and their dopaminergic innervations subserving opposing roles in the regulation of instrumental behavior. However, it is at present unclear if they hold similar roles in the regulation of Pavlovian learning. OBJECTIVE: The present study investigated the role of the dopaminergic innervations of the PL and IL in the modulation of Pavlovian appetitive cue and place conditioning, previously shown to be dependent on the basolateral amygdala and hippocampus, respectively. METHODS: Rats received preconditioning microinfusions of D-amphetamine, cis-flupenthixol, or vehicle solution directly into the PL or IL and were trained to simultaneously acquire conditioned cue and place preference in a radial maze. RESULTS: Preconditioning blockade of dopamine neurotransmission in the PL and amphetamine microinfusions in the IL had the same effect of attenuating place conditioning. In contrast, place conditioning remained intact following preconditioning amphetamine microinfusions in the PL and dopamine receptor blockade in the IL. Instead, conditioned cue preference was attenuated following IL dopamine receptor blockade. CONCLUSION: These data indicate that PL dopaminergic mechanisms are critical for the acquisition of appetitive place learning, while IL dopamine may oppose the influence of PL dopamine upon hippocampal-dependent learning. Furthermore, they implicate a functional reciprocity between mPFC and associated subregions of the nucleus accumbens in the regulation of limbic information processing.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".