Metabotropic group II glutamate receptors mediate cue-triggered increases in incentive motivation for reward
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rationale Reward-associated cues can acquire incentive motivational properties and invigorate reward-seeking actions via Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT). Glutamatergic neurotransmission mediates the appetitive effects of reward-associated cues. We characterized the expression of PIT and its mediation by metabotropic group II glutamate (mGlu2/3) receptor activity in female and male rats. Objectives Across the sexes, we used PIT procedures to determine i) cue-triggered increases in incentive motivation for water reward (Experiment 1), ii) the respective influences of the mGlu2/3 receptor agonist LY379268 and reward devaluation by satiation on this effect (Experiment 2). Methods Water-restricted male and female Sprague-Dawley rats learned to lever press for water. Separately, they learned that one of two auditory stimuli predicts free water (CS+ vs CS-). On PIT test days, the CS+ and CS- were presented non-contingently, and we measured effects on lever pressing under extinction (no water). In Experiment 1, we characterized PIT across the sexes. In Experiment 2, we measured PIT after systemic LY379268 administration (0, 0.3 and 1 mg/kg), and water satiation, respectively. Results Female and male rats showed similar PIT, with CS+ but not CS- presentations potentiating water-seeking behaviour. LY379268 (1 mg/kg) attenuated CS+ evoked increases in both water-associated lever pressing and conditioned approach to the water port. Reward devaluation attenuated both water-seeking and CS+ evoked conditioned approach behaviour. Conclusions The sexes show similar cue-triggered increases in reward ‘wanting’, and water devaluation suppresses both water seeking and cue-triggered anticipation of water reward. Finally, across the sexes, mGlu2/3 receptor activity mediates cue-triggered increases in reward ‘wanting’.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".