Oxygen responses within the nucleus accumbens are associated with individual differences in effort exertion in rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Goal-directed motivated behaviour is crucial for everyday life. Such behaviour is often measured, in rodents, under a progressive ratio (PR) schedule of reinforcement. Previous studies have identified a few brain structures critical for supporting PR performance. However, the association between neural activity within these regions and individual differences in effort-related behaviour is not known. Presently, we used constant potential in vivo oxygen amperometry, a surrogate for functional resonance imaging in rodents, to assess changes in tissue oxygen levels within the nucleus accumbens (NAc) and orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) in male Wistar rats performing a PR task. Within both regions, oxygen responses to rewards increased as the effort exerted to obtain the rewards was larger. Furthermore, higher individual breakpoints were associated with greater magnitude NAc oxygen responses. This association could not be explained by temporal confounds and remained significant when controlling for the different number of completed trials. Animals with higher breakpoints also showed greater magnitude NAc oxygen responses to rewards delivered independently of any behaviour. In contrast, OFC oxygen responses were not associated with individual differences in behavioural performance. The present results suggest that greater NAc oxygen responses following rewards, through a process of incentive motivation, may allow organisms to remain on task for longer and to overcome greater effort costs.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".