MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optogenetic Inhibition Reveals Distinct Roles for Basolateral Amygdala Activity at Discrete Time Points during Risky Decision Making

2017· article· en· W2749985529 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics research
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersNational Institute on Drug Abuse
KeywordsOptogeneticsBasolateral amygdalaDeliberationPsychologyNeurosciencePunishment (psychology)Task (project management)AmygdalaSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Decision making is a multifaceted process, consisting of several distinct phases that likely require different cognitive operations. Previous work showed that the basolateral amygdala (BLA) is a critical substrate for decision making involving risk of punishment; however, it is unclear how the BLA is recruited at different stages of the decision process. To this end, the current study used optogenetics to inhibit the BLA during specific task phases in a model of risky decision making (risky decision-making task) in which rats choose between a small, “safe” reward and a large reward accompanied by varying probabilities of footshock punishment. Male Long–Evans rats received intra-BLA microinjections of viral vectors carrying either halorhodopsin (eNpHR3.0-mCherry) or mCherry alone (control) followed by optic fiber implants and were trained in the risky decision-making task. Laser delivery during the task occurred during intertrial interval, deliberation, or reward outcome phases, the latter of which was further divided into the three possible outcomes (small, safe; large, unpunished; large, punished). Inhibition of the BLA selectively during the deliberation phase decreased choice of the large, risky outcome (decreased risky choice). In contrast, BLA inhibition selectively during delivery of the large, punished outcome increased risky choice. Inhibition had no effect during the other phases, nor did laser delivery affect performance in control rats. Collectively, these data indicate that the BLA can either inhibit or promote choice of risky options, depending on the phase of the decision process in which it is active. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT To date, most behavioral neuroscience research on neural mechanisms of decision making has used techniques that preclude assessment of distinct phases of the decision process. Here we show that optogenetic inhibition of the BLA has opposite effects on choice behavior in a rat model of risky decision making, depending on the phase in which inhibition occurs. BLA inhibition during a period of deliberation between small, safe and large, risky outcomes decreased risky choice. In contrast, BLA inhibition during receipt of the large, punished outcome increased risky choice. These findings highlight the importance of temporally targeted approaches to understand neural substrates underlying complex cognitive processes. More importantly, they reveal novel information about dynamic BLA modulation of risky choice.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.335
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.315 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it