Differential Involvement of NMDA, AMPA/Kainate, and Dopamine Receptors in the Nucleus Accumbens Core in the Acquisition and Performance of Pavlovian Approach Behavior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stimuli paired with primary rewards can acquire emotional valence and the ability to elicit automatic, Pavlovian approach responses that have been shown to be mediated by the nucleus accumbens. The present experiment investigated the effects of infusions of glutamatergic or dopaminergic receptor antagonists into the core of the nucleus accumbens on the acquisition and performance of Pavlovian discriminated approach to an appetitive conditioned stimulus. Rats were trained on an autoshaping task in which a conditioned stimulus (CS+; a lever) was inserted into the operant chamber for 10 sec, after which a food pellet was delivered. Presentation of another lever (CS−) was never followed by food. Subjects developed a conditioned response of approaching and contacting the CS+ selectively, although food delivery was not in any way contingent on the animals9 response. A triple dissociation in the effects of AP-5, LY293558 [(3<i>SR</i>, 4a<i>RS</i>, 6<i>RS</i>, 8a<i>RS</i>)-6-[2-(iH-tetrazol-5-yl)ethyl]-1,2,3,4,4a,5,6,7,8,8a-decahydroiso-quinoline-3-carboxylic acid], and α-flupenthixol infused into the nucleus accumbens core on the acquisition and performance of this conditioned response was observed. The AMPA/kainate receptor antagonist LY293558 disrupted discriminated approach performance but not acquisition, as evidenced by increased approaches to the CS−. In contrast, the NMDA receptor antagonist AP-5 impaired only the acquisition, but not performance, of autoshaping whereas the dopamine D1/D2 receptor antagonist α-flupenthixol decreased approaches to the CS+ during both acquisition and performance. The data are discussed with reference to dissociable interactions of these receptor types with limbic cortical and dopaminergic afferents to the nucleus accumbens core during the acquisition and expression of Pavlovian conditioned approach.
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".