Gavin D Phillips1, Paul K Hitchcott. 1. Department of Psychology, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, UK. g.phillips@psych.york.ac.uk
Abstract
RATIONALE: Two issues were addressed regarding the effects of amygdala dopamine manipulations on associative learning: first, an apparent contradiction between the effects of post- vs. pre-session dopaminergic manipulations and second, the ability of dopaminergic infusions to affect association formation vs. its expression following extended training. OBJECTIVES: The ability of pre-session infusions of a dopamine receptor agonist (R(+) 7-OH-DPAT) to inhibit acquisition of a conditioned approach response was examined and compared with the same manipulation following overtraining. Further experiments extended these findings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Experiment 1 infused pre-session intra-amygdala R(+) 7-OH-DPAT (0, 0.1, 1 nmol) during conditioned approach acquisition. Experiment 2 applied pre-session intra-amygdala R(+) 7-OH-DPAT (0, 0.01, 0.1, 1 nmol) during expression of the same response, once well learned. Experiment 3 required the inhibition of a conditioned approach response following unconditioned stimulus (US) removal. Experiment 4 examined the ability of animals with prior drug experience to acquire a conditioned response to a novel stimulus. RESULTS: Experiments 1-3 showed that pre-session amygdala R(+) 7-OH-DPAT impaired acquisition of either excitatory or inhibitory conditioned responding, but was ineffective following overtraining. Drug-induced impairments in acquisition of a specific conditioned stimulus (CS)-US relationship continued well beyond the cessation of drug treatment, but were found not to transfer to an alternate CS in Experiment 4. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-session dopamine receptor activation within the amygdala may impair the acquisition, but not expression, of CS-US associations. Enhanced learning reported earlier following post-session dopamine receptor activation may occur indirectly through reduced interference with the consolidation of recent learning.
RATIONALE: Two issues were addressed regarding the effects of amygdala dopamine manipulations on associative learning: first, an apparent contradiction between the effects of post- vs. pre-session dopaminergic manipulations and second, the ability of dopaminergic infusions to affect association formation vs. its expression following extended training. OBJECTIVES: The ability of pre-session infusions of a dopamine receptor agonist (R(+) 7-OH-DPAT) to inhibit acquisition of a conditioned approach response was examined and compared with the same manipulation following overtraining. Further experiments extended these findings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Experiment 1 infused pre-session intra-amygdala R(+) 7-OH-DPAT (0, 0.1, 1 nmol) during conditioned approach acquisition. Experiment 2 applied pre-session intra-amygdala R(+) 7-OH-DPAT (0, 0.01, 0.1, 1 nmol) during expression of the same response, once well learned. Experiment 3 required the inhibition of a conditioned approach response following unconditioned stimulus (US) removal. Experiment 4 examined the ability of animals with prior drug experience to acquire a conditioned response to a novel stimulus. RESULTS: Experiments 1-3 showed that pre-session amygdala R(+) 7-OH-DPAT impaired acquisition of either excitatory or inhibitory conditioned responding, but was ineffective following overtraining. Drug-induced impairments in acquisition of a specific conditioned stimulus (CS)-US relationship continued well beyond the cessation of drug treatment, but were found not to transfer to an alternate CS in Experiment 4. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-session dopamine receptor activation within the amygdala may impair the acquisition, but not expression, of CS-US associations. Enhanced learning reported earlier following post-session dopamine receptor activation may occur indirectly through reduced interference with the consolidation of recent learning.
Authors: F Weiss; R Martin-Fardon; R Ciccocioppo; T M Kerr; D L Smith; O Ben-Shahar Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2001-09 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Jeffrey W Dalley; Tim D Fryer; Laurent Brichard; Emma S J Robinson; David E H Theobald; Kristjan Lääne; Yolanda Peña; Emily R Murphy; Yasmene Shah; Katrin Probst; Irina Abakumova; Franklin I Aigbirhio; Hugh K Richards; Young Hong; Jean-Claude Baron; Barry J Everitt; Trevor W Robbins Journal: Science Date: 2007-03-02 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Kenneth J Thiel; Jennifer M Wenzel; Nathan S Pentkowski; Rebecca J Hobbs; Andrea T Alleweireldt; Janet L Neisewander Journal: Behav Brain Res Date: 2010-06-19 Impact factor: 3.332