Dopamine Signaling through D<sub>1</sub>-Like versus D<sub>2</sub>-Like Receptors in the Nucleus Accumbens Core versus Shell Differentially Modulates Nicotine Reward Sensitivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Considerable evidence implicates the mesolimbic dopamine (DA) system in the processing of nicotine's reinforcing properties, specifically the ventral tegmental area (VTA) and the terminal fields of VTA DAergic projections to the "core" (NAcore) and "shell" (NAshell) subdivisions of the nucleus accumbens (NAc). However, the specific roles of DA D(1)-like and D(2)-like receptor subtypes in nicotine reward processing within these NAc subregions have not been elucidated. We report that microinfusions of DA D(1)-like or D(2)-like receptor-specific antagonists into NAcore or NAshell double dissociate the rewarding and aversive properties of systemic or intra-VTA nicotine, and differentially regulate sensitivity to the rewarding properties as well as the motivational valence of either intra-VTA or systemic nicotine administration. Using a place conditioning procedure, NAshell infusions of a D(2)-like receptor antagonist switched the motivational valence of intra-VTA nicotine from aversive to rewarding and potentiated nicotine reward sensitivity to sub-reward threshold intra-VTA nicotine doses. In contrast, NAcore infusions of a D(1)-like receptor antagonist switched intra-VTA nicotine aversion to reward, and potentiated reward sensitivity to sub-reward threshold nicotine doses. Thus, D(1)-like versus D(2)-like receptors in NAcore versus NAshell subdivisions play functionally dissociable roles in modulating systemic or intra-VTA nicotine motivational 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 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".