Drugs of abuse induce sensitization, which is defined as enhanced response to additional drug following a period of withdrawal. Sensitization occurs in both humans and animal models of drug reinforcement and contributes substantially to the addictive nature of drugs of abuse, because it is thought to represent enhanced motivational wanting for drug. The ventral pallidum, a key member of the reward pathway, contributes to behaviors associated with reward, such as sensitization. Dopamine inputs to the ventral pallidum have not been directly characterized. Here we provide anatomical, neurochemical, and behavioral evidence demonstrating that dopamine terminals in the ventral pallidum contribute to reward in mice. We report subregional differences in dopamine release, measured by ex vivo fast-scan cyclic voltammetry: rostral ventral pallidum exhibits increased dopamine release and uptake compared with caudal ventral pallidum, which is correlated with tissue expression of dopaminergic proteins. We then subjected mice to a methamphetamine-sensitization protocol to investigate the contribution of dopaminergic projections to the region in reward related behavior. Methamphetamine-sensitized animals displayed a 508% and 307% increase in baseline dopamine release in the rostral and caudal ventral pallidum, respectively. Augmented dopamine release in the rostral ventral pallidum was significantly correlated with sensitized locomotor activity. Moreover, this presynaptic dopaminergic plasticity occurred only in the ventral pallidum and not in the ventral or dorsal striatum, suggesting that dopamine release in the ventral pallidum may be integrally important to drug-induced sensitization.
Drugs of abuse induce sensitization, which is defined as enhanced response to additional drug following a period of withdrawal. Sensitization occurs in both humans and animal models of drug reinforcement and contributes substantially to the addictive nature of drugs of abuse, because it is thought to represent enhanced motivational wanting for drug. The ventral pallidum, a key member of the reward pathway, contributes to behaviors associated with reward, such as sensitization. Dopamine inputs to the ventral pallidum have not been directly characterized. Here we provide anatomical, neurochemical, and behavioral evidence demonstrating that dopamine terminals in the ventral pallidum contribute to reward in mice. We report subregional differences in dopamine release, measured by ex vivo fast-scan cyclic voltammetry: rostral ventral pallidum exhibits increased dopamine release and uptake compared with caudal ventral pallidum, which is correlated with tissue expression of dopaminergic proteins. We then subjected mice to a methamphetamine-sensitization protocol to investigate the contribution of dopaminergic projections to the region in reward related behavior. Methamphetamine-sensitized animals displayed a 508% and 307% increase in baseline dopamine release in the rostral and caudal ventral pallidum, respectively. Augmented dopamine release in the rostral ventral pallidum was significantly correlated with sensitized locomotor activity. Moreover, this presynaptic dopaminergic plasticity occurred only in the ventral pallidum and not in the ventral or dorsal striatum, suggesting that dopamine release in the ventral pallidum may be integrally important to drug-induced sensitization.
Psychostimulant
(e.g., cocaine
and methamphetamine) abuse is a major public health concern. In 2013,
an estimated 2.15 million Americans were recent psychostimulant users,
contributing significantly to the estimated $712 billion societal
cost of substance abuse.[1−4] One of the most pernicious characteristics of addiction
is its persistence: 40–60% of drug users relapse within one
year of abstinence.[5] Chronic drug use alters
brain neurochemistry, and these changes do not quickly normalize after
drug cessation.[6−8] Understanding the long lasting neurobiological changes
induced by chronic drug use is critical for both the treatment of
addiction and the prevention of relapse.One such persistent
neurobiological change caused by drugs of abuse
is sensitization, defined by heightened response to additional drug
following a period of withdrawal. Sensitization occurs in human[9,10] and animal[11,12] models following chronic drug
exposure. The incentive sensitization hypothesis of addiction posits
that sensitized behavior (typically measured in rodents as augmented
locomotor behavior) stems from hypersensitization of mesocorticolimbic
circuits, resulting in enhanced salience, or motivational wanting,
to drugs and drug-related cues.[13] Noncontingent
dosing regimens, such as sensitization and conditioned place preference,
recapitulate many neurocircuitry alterations induced by response-contingent
dosing regimens, such as self-administration and reinstatement (reviewed
by Steketee and Kalivas[14] and Vezina[15]). Given the similarity in circuitry changes,
it has been proposed that these models share similar construct validity,
and both recapitulate important aspects of the human condition.[14] Recent studies have identified the ventral pallidum,
the major output of the nucleus accumbens, as a mediator of sensitization.[16−24]The ventral pallidum was originally described as the ventral
extension
of the globus pallidus; while this description partially defines the
anatomy of the ventral pallidum, the subcommisural structure extends
far more rostral than its globus counterpart, reaching to the most
rostral portions of the striatum (Figures and 2). The ventral
pallidum forms reciprocal feedback loops with the major structures
involved in reward signaling, including the nucleus accumbens (NAc),
ventral tegmental area (VTA), substantia nigra, lateral hypothalamus,
thalamus, amygdala, and others.[25−27] In turn, the ventral pallidum
projects strongly to the brain stem, including the pedunculopontine
tegmentum, acting as a central convergence point for translation of
limbic stimuli into motor output (reviewed by Smith et al.[28]). Additionally, stimulation of the ventral pallidum
is capable of directly initiating reward signaling.[29−31]
Figure 1
Dopamine neuroanatomy
in the ventral pallidum. Immunohistochemistry
in coronal (field view) and sagittal (magnified) slices revealed the
expression of dopaminergic proteins in the ventral pallidum (dotted
red lines). SV2C expression was used to delineate the ventral pallidum.
TH, VMAT2, and DAT expression are shown in the RVP, CVP, dorsal striatum
(DSTR), and cortex (CTX). Scale bar = 200 μm.
Figure 2
Identification of ventral pallidal slices. RVP and CVP
slices (blue
boxes) were chosen as shown in the diagram, using the anterior commissure
for reference. The most rostral slices were not measured, given the
technical difficulty of targeting ventral pallidum islands in unstained
tissue. Additionally, the breadth of the ventral pallidum is shown
by synaptic vesicle glycoprotein 2C (SV2C) immunohistochemistry. Dotted
lines delineate the border of the ventral pallidum.
Dopamine neuroanatomy
in the ventral pallidum. Immunohistochemistry
in coronal (field view) and sagittal (magnified) slices revealed the
expression of dopaminergic proteins in the ventral pallidum (dotted
red lines). SV2C expression was used to delineate the ventral pallidum.
TH, VMAT2, and DAT expression are shown in the RVP, CVP, dorsal striatum
(DSTR), and cortex (CTX). Scale bar = 200 μm.Identification of ventral pallidal slices. RVP and CVP
slices (blue
boxes) were chosen as shown in the diagram, using the anterior commissure
for reference. The most rostral slices were not measured, given the
technical difficulty of targeting ventral pallidum islands in unstained
tissue. Additionally, the breadth of the ventral pallidum is shown
by synaptic vesicle glycoprotein 2C (SV2C) immunohistochemistry. Dotted
lines delineate the border of the ventral pallidum.Electrophysiological, neuroanatomical, and behavioral
data suggest
differential roles for rostral versus caudal ventral pallidum (RVP
and CVP, respectively). The CVP, defined here as the ventral pallidum
caudal to the fused anterior commissure (+0.14 bregma),[32] contains neurons electrophysiologically similar
to neurons in the globus pallidus. In contrast, RVP neurons, defined
as rostral to the fused anterior commissure,[32] are more akin to their neighboring neurons in the NAc.[33−35] Further, CVP stimulation is considerably more rewarding than RVP
stimulation, though rats will self-administer direct electrical stimulation
to both regions.[29] Ablation of RVP signaling
attenuates cue-induced cocaine reinstatement, whereas CVP inhibition
blocks drug-primed reinstatement.[32]Several pieces of evidence identify the ventral pallidum as an
important participant in drug-induced sensitization. The ventral pallidum
is integrally involved in induction of morphine sensitization; pharmacological
inhibition of μ opioid receptors by microinjection into the
ventral pallidum completely abolishes both induction and expression
of sensitized behavior.[16,20] For stimulants, methamphetamine
(METH) sensitization alters pCREB and ΔFosB expression in the
ventral pallidum and NAc of sensitized rats at 3 days post-drug withdrawal,
indicative of increased postsynaptic activity. At 14 days postwithdrawal
rats remain sensitized to METH, and activity-dependent changes (upregulation
of pCREB and ΔFosB expression) persist only in the ventral pallidum,[18] suggesting that activity in the ventral pallidum
may drive sensitized behavioral response to stimulants.The
ventral pallidum receives input from VTA dopaminergic neurons.
The role of dopaminergic innervation in subregions of the ventral
pallidum has not been fully described, though our research builds
on several key experiments suggesting that dopamine in the region
plays a key role in reward behavior. First, microinjection of stimulants
or dopamine agonists or antagonists into the ventral pallidum elicits
a motor response and can induce sensitization and place preference.[30,31,36,37] Further, 6-OHDA lesioning of the ventral pallidum, which preferentially
lesions dopamine terminals, blocks cocaine place preference acquisition.[38] Additionally, amphetamine sensitization in rats
increases production of dopamine metabolites 3,4-dihydroxyphenoylacetic
acid and homovanillic acid in the ventral pallidum.[23] Though the mechanism of this augmentation has not been
established, one likely explanation is increased dopamine release.
Given these data, we hypothesized that stimulant sensitization induces
presynaptic dopamine plasticity and that such enhanced dopamine release
contributes to the long-term behavioral alterations associated with
stimulants. To test this hypothesis, we used fast-scan cyclic voltammetry
to measure dopamine release in the RVP and the CVP and demonstrate
a substantial and selective enhancement of dopamine transmission in
the ventral pallidum of METH-sensitized mice.
Results and Discussion
The contribution of dopaminergic inputs in the ventral pallidum
to reward behavior is not well established. Here, we present the first
recording of dopamine release in the ventral pallidum by FSCV. We
utilized the technique to assess differential dopamine neurotransmission
in rostral versus caudal ventral pallidum. Additionally, we provide
evidence of selective augmentation of baseline dopamine transmission
in the ventral pallidum of sensitized mice.
Dopaminergic Neuroanatomy
of the Ventral Pallidum
We
performed immunohistochemistry to define dopaminergic neuroanatomy
in the ventral pallidum (Figure ). The synaptic vesicle glycoprotein 2C (SV2C) is robustly
expressed throughout the entire ventral pallidum,[39,40] irrespective of subregion, and was used to define the structure.
Dopamine terminal markers tyrosine hydroxylase (TH), the dopamine
transporter (DAT), and the vesicular monoamine transporter 2 (VMAT2)
are expressed in the ventral pallidum. TH expression is robust in
the region, particularly in the RVP, though less than in canonically
dopamine-rich regions such as the striatum. VMAT2 is sparsely but
consistently expressed throughout the ventral pallidum. Of the three
dopamine terminal markers, DAT is expressed at the lowest levels,
with slightly more expression in RVP than CVP. Given the relative
abundance of TH compared with DAT, these terminals likely rely on
synthesis of new dopamine for release rather than recycling of neurotransmitter
via plasmalemmal uptake.These results are supported by immunogold
electron microscopy studies conducted by Mengual and Pickel, which
show that TH and DAT are both expressed in terminal regions and small,
unmyelinated axons within the ventral pallidum, though DAT expression
is significantly lower than TH expression.[41,42] Interestingly, this work also identified graded expression of the
proteins in medial and lateral subregions of the ventral palidum,
with DAT expressed most strongly in lateral versus medial ventral
pallidum.[41] Additionally, TH expression
in the medial region does not strongly colocalize with presynaptic
dopamine D2 autoreceptors.[42] These three
observations, low DAT, high TH, and no autoreceptor expression, are
the hallmark identifiers of a recently identified subpopulation of
atypically fast-firing VTA dopamine neurons that project to the medial
prefrontal cortex.[43] In line with the tissue
expression of DAT, voltammetry recordings of dopamine release in the
prefrontal cortex reveal substantially decreased dopamine clearance
compared with that in striatal regions.[44] Low DAT/TH ratio and reduced D2 autoreceptor expression are also
hallmarks of dopamine neuron terminals within the ventral pallidum,
and as described below, these neurons also have substantially decreased
clearance kinetics. Additionally, it has been demonstrated that animals
that lack DAT have profound neuronal plasticity due to reduced clearance
rate, which potentiates the signal.[45] Extrapolation
of this data implies that regions that express very little DAT but
moderate amounts of TH, such as the prefrontal cortex or ventral pallidum,
may be at enhanced risk for pathogenic alterations due to augmented
signaling produced by drugs of abuse.
Dopamine Release in Subregions
of the Ventral Pallidum by Fast-Scan
Cyclic Voltammetry (FSCV)
Dopamine release in the ventral
pallidum was detected by FSCV. Initial experiments to identify optimal
stimulation parameters were conducted in sagittal brain slices, irrespective
of subregion. The optimal parameters identified were 60 pulses, 60
Hz, 600 μA, 2 ms, at 10 min intervals (Figure ). Though larger current and pulse width
stimulation resulted in larger dopamine overflow, these settings resulted
in electrolytic lesioning in a number of brain slices, necessitating
reduction of these parameters.
Figure 3
Optimization of stimulation parameters.
Pulse number (10–60),
current (500–700 μA), pulse width (2–4 ms), and
collection frequency (5–10 min) were varied systematically,
and resultant dopamine release was measured. Optimal stimulation parameters
of 60 pulses, 60 Hz, 600 μA, and 2 ms pulse width at 10 min
intervals produced the most consistent release without lesioning the
slice.
Optimization of stimulation parameters.
Pulse number (10–60),
current (500–700 μA), pulse width (2–4 ms), and
collection frequency (5–10 min) were varied systematically,
and resultant dopamine release was measured. Optimal stimulation parameters
of 60 pulses, 60 Hz, 600 μA, and 2 ms pulse width at 10 min
intervals produced the most consistent release without lesioning the
slice.To investigate subregional differences
within the ventral pallidum,
coronal slices containing the RVP and CVP were carefully chosen to
ensure correct identification of the appropriate region (Figures and 4A–D). Stimulation elicited an average of 1.04 and 0.38
μM dopamine release in the RVP and CVP, respectively (p = 0.011, RVP n = 19, CVP n = 12, Figure C–D,
G). Additionally, dopamine clearance, as measured by the rate constant
tau, was faster in RVP than CVP (3.19 versus 8.25 s, respectively,
RVP n = 19, CVP n = 12, Figure H), though significantly
slower than in dorsal or ventral striatum (Supplemental Figure 1, 0.59 and 0.75 s, respectively, p = 0.002, one-way ANOVA with Newman–Keuls multiple comparison
test). Nomifensine (10 μM), a dopamine and norepinephrine transporter
inhibitor, increased release 260.2% in the RVP (p = 0.003, n = 3, Figure I, one-way ANOVA with Newman–Keuls
multiple comparison test) and 23.9% in the CVP (p = 0.003, n = 3, Figure J, one-way ANOVA with Newman–Keuls
multiple comparison test). These data further confirm enhanced DAT
expression in RVP compared with CVP, given the 10-fold increase in
augmentation in RVP. Neither region demonstrated substantial or significant
enhancement of signal in response to α2-adrenergic autoreceptor
idazoxan (Figure I,J),
which augments norepinephrine release, further confirming that the
measured analyte was dopamine.
Figure 4
Confirmation of recording site. Slices
were carefully chosen by
visualization of structures in accordance with the Allen Brain Atlas
(A–D, VP shown in gray). Representative recording sites demonstrate
identification of ventral pallidum boundaries (dotted red lines) using
the anterior commissure (green, A, B), lateral olfactory tubercle
(orange, A), and the internal capside (fuschia, B). To further confirm,
several slices were electrolytically lesioned at the recording site,
and the tissue was cleared via CLARITY. RVP and CVP lesions in transmitted
light (E, F) and DAT immunolabeled (green, G, H) representative slices
are shown. Lack of significant colocalization with DAT expression
is indicative of correct electrode placement. NET and DAT inhibitor
nomifensine (10 μM) augmented release in RVP (I, p = 0.003, n = 3, one-way ANOVA with Newman–Keuls
multiple comparison test) and CVP (J, p = 0.003, n = 3, one-way ANOVA with Newman–Keuls multiple comparison
test). Selective NET inhibition with idazoxan (10 μM) did not
significantly increase release in either region (I, J).
Figure 5
Dopamine release in RVP and CVP. Stimulation of RVP produced
significantly
greater dopamine release compared with stimulation of CVP (A–G,
1.04 μM vs 0.38 μM, respectively; p =
0.011, RVP n = 19, CVP, n = 12,
two-tailed t test). Dopamine clearance is slower
in CVP than RVP (H, p = 0.002, RVP n = 19, CVP n = 12, two-tailed t test). Representative color plots (A, B) and voltammagrams (E, F)
are shown. Current time traces (C, D) are cumulative. Dotted lines
indicate stimulation boundaries.
Figure 6
Chronic METH treatment enhances baseline dopamine release in the
ventral pallidum. Mice were sensitized to METH or saline (2 mg/kg,
IP, 7 days). METH pretreated animals have enhanced baseline DA release.
In RVP slices, METH pretreatment augmented baseline dopamine release
by 508% (A,C, p = 0.003, n = 6,
two-tailed t test). In CVP slices, METH pretreatment
increased dopamine release by 307% (B,D, p = 0.017, n = 8, two-tailed t test). RVP release
is correlated with motor behavior (E, r2 = 0.6449, p = 0.0296, n = 7, linear
regression analysis), whereas there is no correlation between baseline
dopamine release and motor behavior in the CVP (F, r2 = 0.001, p = 0.931, n = 8, linear regression analysis).
Confirmation of recording site. Slices
were carefully chosen by
visualization of structures in accordance with the Allen Brain Atlas
(A–D, VP shown in gray). Representative recording sites demonstrate
identification of ventral pallidum boundaries (dotted red lines) using
the anterior commissure (green, A, B), lateral olfactory tubercle
(orange, A), and the internal capside (fuschia, B). To further confirm,
several slices were electrolytically lesioned at the recording site,
and the tissue was cleared via CLARITY. RVP and CVP lesions in transmitted
light (E, F) and DAT immunolabeled (green, G, H) representative slices
are shown. Lack of significant colocalization with DAT expression
is indicative of correct electrode placement. NET and DAT inhibitor
nomifensine (10 μM) augmented release in RVP (I, p = 0.003, n = 3, one-way ANOVA with Newman–Keuls
multiple comparison test) and CVP (J, p = 0.003, n = 3, one-way ANOVA with Newman–Keuls multiple comparison
test). Selective NET inhibition with idazoxan (10 μM) did not
significantly increase release in either region (I, J).Dopamine release in RVP and CVP. Stimulation of RVP produced
significantly
greater dopamine release compared with stimulation of CVP (A–G,
1.04 μM vs 0.38 μM, respectively; p =
0.011, RVP n = 19, CVP, n = 12,
two-tailed t test). Dopamine clearance is slower
in CVP than RVP (H, p = 0.002, RVP n = 19, CVP n = 12, two-tailed t test). Representative color plots (A, B) and voltammagrams (E, F)
are shown. Current time traces (C, D) are cumulative. Dotted lines
indicate stimulation boundaries.Chronic METH treatment enhances baseline dopamine release in the
ventral pallidum. Mice were sensitized to METH or saline (2 mg/kg,
IP, 7 days). METH pretreated animals have enhanced baseline DA release.
In RVP slices, METH pretreatment augmented baseline dopamine release
by 508% (A,C, p = 0.003, n = 6,
two-tailed t test). In CVP slices, METH pretreatment
increased dopamine release by 307% (B,D, p = 0.017, n = 8, two-tailed t test). RVP release
is correlated with motor behavior (E, r2 = 0.6449, p = 0.0296, n = 7, linear
regression analysis), whereas there is no correlation between baseline
dopamine release and motor behavior in the CVP (F, r2 = 0.001, p = 0.931, n = 8, linear regression analysis).Because this is a novel region for FSCV experiments, recording
site validity was carefully assessed. One key advantage of slice voltammetry
is visualization of the recording site, which ameliorates many of
the concerns of electrode placement. Slices were carefully chosen
as described in Figure A–D, using the anterior commissure, internal capsule, and
lateral olfactory tract (which are readily visible in slices) as reference.
Additionally, the recording site in a number of brain slices was electrolytically
lesioned using a new electrode (using the stimulation electrode as
a reference to maintain site location, n = 6). These
brain slices were then embedded in a hydrogel solution followed by
passive lipid clearing, generating an optically clear and antibody-permeable
slice.[46,47] In both RVP and CVP brain slices, recording
sites did not colocalize strongly with DAT compared with neighboring
characteristically dopaminergic structures, NAc and dorsal striatum
(STR, Figure H). DAT
expression was chosen due to the incredibly high specificity of the
antibody for dopaminergic regions. Strong and specific antibodies
are vital to effective CLARITY staining. Other antibodies that specifically
label the ventral pallidum, including SV2C and substance P, generated
insufficient resolution to be viable for assessing electrode placement.The ventral pallidum is a heterogeneous structure; several groups
have identified key differences in the neurochemical,[28] electrical,[35,48] and anatomical[25,26,32,35,48] properties of the RVP versus the CVP. Here, we add
to the evidence of dichotomy between the structures by characterizing
differential dopamine release within the ventral pallidum, with highest
dopamine release and uptake in the rostral regions (Figure ). Increased dopamine tone
in the RVP versus the CVP is coupled with enhanced dopamine clearance,
evidenced by decreased rate constant, tau (Figure H), enhanced effect of plasmalemmal transporter
inhibition (Figure I,J), and increased tissue expression of DAT (Figure ).The potential behavioral importance
of differential dopamine release
within the ventral pallidum is of particular interest. Microiontophoretic
injection of dopamine or dopamine receptor agonists into the ventral
pallidum alters firing in about 50% of tested neurons, both increasing
and decreasing postsynaptic activity.[49,50] Additionally,
coadministration of dopamine with GABA or glutamate reduces neuronal
firing rate, though potentiation was observed in a subset of recordings.[51] Interestingly, this work displayed a rostrocaudal
distribution in the neuromodulatory effect of exogenous dopamine administration,
with less alteration of GABA and glutamate activity with coapplication
of dopamine in the rostral subregion. This is not surprising, given
the reduction in tau and dopamine transporter level in the region.
Assuming an equivalent administration in both regions, dopamine injection
in the CVP should have a greater effect, because it persists in the
synaptic space substantially longer than in the RVP. Recent work identified
that in a rat reinstatement model, RVP modulates cue response,[32] whereas CVP is more attuned to modulation of
hedonic response.[29,52−55] Given the enhanced efficacy of
dopamine in the CVP, the potential importance of these terminals for
modulation of plasticity in response to hedonic stimuli is profound.
Likewise, plasticity induced by dopamine release in the RVP may be
integral to cue-dependent behavior. Though clearance is faster in
rostral than caudal subregions of the ventral pallidum, it is still
substantially slower than striatal clearance. Additionally, the RVP
releases significantly more dopamine than the CVP; thus dopamine-induced
synaptic modulation may be quite profound in the RVP. Finally, the
lack of association with presynaptic autoreceptors makes these neurons
prime candidates for presynaptic plasticity, since activation of D2
autoreceptors is thought to reduce dopamine production by inhibition
of TH,[56−58] alter VMAT2 expression,[59] and augment DAT function,[60−62] thereby inhibiting dopamine signaling.
Further, D2 knockout mice have substantially augmented dopamine release
compared with WT controls.[63] Thus, dopamine
release in the ventral pallidum, which persists for many seconds within
the synaptic space and is not regulated by D2-dependent feedback mechanisms,
may make the region uniquely vulnerable to modulation by drugs of
abuse. Further investigation into how dopamine inputs in the ventral
pallidum modulate both pre- and postsynaptic plasticity is key to
more fully understanding the mechanistic importance of these projections.
Chronic METH Treatment Enhances Baseline Dopamine Release in
the Ventral Pallidum
To determine whether sensitization to
METH persistently enhances dopamine release in the ventral pallidum,
we performed sensitization experiments.[64] Mice received 2 mg/kg METH or saline intraperitoneally for 7 days.
Following a 7-day washout (on day 14), we challenged all animals with
1 mg/kg METH and measured locomotor response. Mice pretreated with
METH exhibited marked sensitization (Supplementary Figure 2, 224% increase compared with saline pretreated animals, p < 0.0001, n = 21, two-tailed t test). METH-induced behavior,[65] dopamine overflow,[66] and direct measurement
of METH concentration in brain tissue[67] return to baseline within 4 h of drug administration. Because METH
is no longer present within the brains of challenged animals, baseline
neurochemical changes were assessed the following day. On day 15,
we extracted brains and performed FSCV. In this drug-free state, sensitized
mice displayed a 507% increase in dopamine release in RVP (p = 0.003, n = 6, Figure A, two-tailed t test) and
a 308% increase in CVP (p = 0.017, n = 8, Figure B, two-tailed t test) compared with saline controls. This effect was selective
to the ventral pallidum: no augmented release was observed in DSTR
or NAc core or shell (Figure , Table ).
Interestingly, elevated locomotor activity is directly correlated
with the magnitude of dopamine release in the RVP (r2 = 0.645, p = 0.03, n = 7, Figure , linear
regression analysis). No correlation exists between baseline dopamine
release and motor behavior in the CVP (r2 = 0.001, p = 0.931, n = 8, Figure , linear regression
analysis). Though it is not likely that residual drug is present during
FSCV experiments, it is possible that drug challenge produces an acute
augmentation of dopamine release in sensitized animals that we are
capturing by assessing 24 h after testing. Because all animals (METH
sensitized and saline controls) receive the 1 mg/kg METH challenge,
this effect would still be due to sensitization. Though beyond the
scope of this initial work, additional experiments to assess the time
course of augmented release could reveal interesting insights into
the role of the ventral pallidum in sensitization.
Figure 7
METH-sensitization preferentially
augments dopamine release in
the ventral pallidum. FSCV of dorsal and ventral striatal regions
revealed no increase in baseline dopamine release of sensitized animals
(A–D). Augmented dopamine release is restricted to the ventral
pallidum (E, F). Concentration time traces are averaged for 3–8
mice; dotted lines represent standard error of the mean.
Table 1
Peak Dopamine Release in Sensitized
Animalsa
DA release (μM)
region
saline
METH
relative
change
DSTR
1.38(0.40)
1.54(0.23)
111.5 (p = 0.62, n = 7)
NA, core
2.85(0.60)
3.26(1.01)
114.3 (p = 0.73, n = 8)
NA, med shell
0.62(0.19)
0.75(0.23)
121.1 (p = 0.70, n = 3)
NA, lat shell
1.43(0.39)
1.08(0.14)
75.5 (p = 0.40, n = 7)
RVP
0.75(0.16)
3.8(0.85)
506.7 (p = 0.002, n = 6)
CVP
0.38(0.06)
1.17(0.35)
307.9 (p = 0.004, n = 5)
Animals sensitized
to METH have
significantly augmented peak release in RVP and CVP. No significant
enhancement was observed in dorsal striatum or nucleus accumbens (two-tailed
t-test). Parentheticals are standard error of the mean.
METH-sensitization preferentially
augments dopamine release in
the ventral pallidum. FSCV of dorsal and ventral striatal regions
revealed no increase in baseline dopamine release of sensitized animals
(A–D). Augmented dopamine release is restricted to the ventral
pallidum (E, F). Concentration time traces are averaged for 3–8
mice; dotted lines represent standard error of the mean.Animals sensitized
to METH have
significantly augmented peak release in RVP and CVP. No significant
enhancement was observed in dorsal striatum or nucleus accumbens (two-tailed
t-test). Parentheticals are standard error of the mean.The subregional difference in motor
response is of particular interest,
given the heterogeneity of signaling in the two subregions with respect
to behavior. The CVP modulates hedonic response.[53] Direct electrical stimulation of the CVP is highly rewarding,
with threshold frequency (a mathematical calculation indicative of
the reinforcing efficacy of stimulation) similar to those observed
in the regions of highest reward, VTA and dorsal raphe.[29] Ablation of CVP signaling produces sucrose aversion[28,54] and blocks drug primed reinstatement of cocaine seeking.[32] This proposed hedonic hotspot led to the theory
that the CVP plays a major role in drug “liking”. Less
is known about the RVP, but it may be more involved in modulation
of drug “wanting” since ablation of the region abolishes
cue-induced cocaine reinstatement.[28,32] Interestingly,
expression of locomotor sensitization is cue dependent: animals moved
to a novel environment following sensitization induction do not express
heightened locomotor response on test day.[68−71] Thus, it is logical that augmented
dopamine release in the RVP is strongly associated with a cue-dependent
behavior like locomotor sensitization.
Mechanistic Considerations
The mechanism of augmented
dopamine release in the ventral pallidum of sensitized animals is
not clear, though long-term plasticity in the region is apparent.
In general, discussions of plasticity normally address augmented postsynaptic
response to a given stimulus. Postsynaptic plasticity can have two
possible causes: enhanced sensitivity of postsynaptic receptors or
enhanced presynaptic release. One of the key advantages of voltammetry
is the ability to directly examine presynaptic release. Here we show
that chronic METH administration enhances presynaptic release in the
absence of exogenous drug (Figure ), suggesting that METH induces long-term modulation
and enhancement of baseline dopamine signaling. Further, dopamine
plasticity only occurs in the ventral pallidum (Figure , Table ) and is tightly correlated with sensitized behavior
in rostral subregions (Figure ). Plasticity in reward circuits underlies addiction, particularly
relapse.[72] A major addiction hypothesis
posits that addiction occurs when normally innocuous cues become linked
with drug consumption.[13] Reintroduction
to such cues, even after years of abstinence, can elicit relapse.[72] It is thought that these cue associations are
encoded in the brain via plasticity in reward circuits.[72] Thus, long-term dopamine plasticity in the ventral
pallidum, particularly in the RVP, which modulates cue associations,[32] likely plays an integral role in addiction.Additional mechanistic contributions may include neurocircuitry changes
to reward pathways in sensitized animals. Chronic stimulant administration
induces long-term depression of GABAergic NAc projections to the ventral
pallidum.[17,73] Additionally, pharmacological GABA receptor
inhibition in the ventral pallidum increases locomotor behavior.[74] It follows that depression of GABAergic inputs
to the ventral pallidum would contribute to enhanced dopamine tone
in the structure, which may contribute to the augmented motor response
observed in sensitization. Additionally, the NAc shell is thought
to be particularly important in sensitized behavior.[75] Interestingly, the shell projects primarily to the medial
subcommissural ventral pallidum,[76] which
is encompassed in our RVP slice. This may explain both the disparity
in augmentation of dopamine tone between the CVP and RVP and the correlation
between dopamine release and motor behavior in the RVP of sensitized
mice (Figure ).The ventral pallidum is a heterogeneous structure, and the behaviors
it contributes to are complex. Here, we define subregional differences
in dopamine release, dopamine clearance, and dopaminergic protein
expression in the ventral pallidum. Additionally, we identify subregional
differences in response to METH sensitization in the ventral pallidum.
To our knowledge, this is the first report of enhanced baseline dopamine
release in any brain region of behaviorally sensitized mice. These
data demonstrate that METH induces presynaptic dopaminergic plasticity
and suggest that augmented dopamine release, selectively in the ventral
pallidum, mediates locomotor sensitization and may initiate drug seeking
motor behavior.
Methods
Mice
All procedures were carried out in accordance
with NIH guidelines and those of the Institutional Animal Care and
Use Committee at Emory University. Male C57BL/6 mice were purchased
from Charles River Laboratories. Mice were group housed in a 12-h
light cycled room with food and water ad libitum. Behavioral and neurochemical
experiments were conducted at 3–6 months of age. Most of the
literature cited within the introductory section was conducted in rats. These experiments were conducted in mice
due to the enhanced genetic tools available in mice, since subsequent
research will build upon these preliminary studies, analyzing dopamine
release within the ventral pallidum of genetically manipulated mice.
Immunohistochemistry
Mice were perfused transcardially
with 4% paraformaldehyde. Brains were removed and processed for frozen
sectioning. Slices (40 μm) underwent hot citrate buffer antigen
retrieval (Biogenex) and were blocked in 10% normal goat serum or
3% normal horse serum. Polyclonal anti-SV2C serum was isolated from
rabbits injected with an N-terminal peptide (amino acids 97–114:
STNQGKDSIVSVGQPKG) conjugated to Imject maleimide activated mcKLH
(Thermo Scientific), and sera were generated for our laboratory using
Covance Custom Immunology Services. Sections were incubated with polyclonal
rabbit anti-SV2C serum (Covance, 1:2500), rat anti-DAT (Millipore
MAB369, 1:1000), mouse anti-TH (Millipore MAB318, 1:1000), or rabbit
anti-VMAT2 (generated in our laboratory,[77] 1:10000) followed by biotinylated secondary antibody (Jackson ImmunoResearch:
goat anti-rabbit biotin 111-065-144, goat anti-mouse biotin 115-065-003,
goat anti-rat 112-065-003). Visualization was performed with a 3,3-diaminobenzidine
(DAB) reaction (Vector Laboratories) for biotinylated secondary antibodies.
Images were acquired with a NeuroLucida epifluorescent microscope
(MicroBrightField).
Fast-Scan Cyclic Voltammetry
FSCV
was performed in
sagittal and coronal slices as previously described.[77] In brief, animals were rapidly decapitated, and the brain
was sliced at 300 μM in oxygenated, ice-cold artificial cerebral
spinal fluid (aCSF [in mM]: NaCl [126], KCl [2.5], NaH2PO4 [1.2], CaCl2 [2.4], MgCl2 [1.2],
NaHCO3 [25], and glucose [11], pH 7.4) with added 194 mM
sucrose using a vibrating tissue slicer. Slices containing the ventral
pallidum were identified visually primarily by the shape of the anterior
commissure (AC), which is a key advantage of slice voltammetry. The
slice rostral of the fully fused AC (Figure ) was chosen as the RVP slice (Figures and 4A,C), and the slice immediately caudal, where the AC begins to break
up, was chosen as the CVP slice (Figures and 4B,D). Slice
orientation was maintained throughout the experiment to ensure that
the slice surface recorded from was nearest the fused AC in either
the rostral or caudal direction. Brain slices were placed in a slice
perfusion chamber and incubated at room temperature in oxygenated
aCSF for 30 min. The appropriate slice was then transferred to a recording
chamber where it was perfused with oxygenated aCSF at 32 °C.
Following a 30 min incubation, a carbon fiber microelectrode was inserted
50–70 μM below the surface of the brain slice and the
stimulating electrode was placed approximately 250 μM away.
DA release was elicited by electrical stimulation (1–60 pulses,
30–60 Hz, 300–700 μA). Optimal stimulation parameters
identified for the ventral pallidum were 60 Hz, 60 pulses, 600 μA,
and 2 ms pulse width with 10 min intervals between stimuli (Figure ). Stimulation parameters
for all other regions were 1 pulse, 700 μA, and 4 ms pulse width
at 5 min intervals. A cyclic voltage ramp (−0.4 to 1.3 V) was
applied to the carbon fiber microelectrode, and resultant background-subtracted
current was measured. All reported regions were surveyed with 4 recording
replicates at 3 independent sites, which were averaged for each animal.
Experiments were conducted and analyzed using Demon software (Wake
Forest University). Following experimentation, a number of slices
were electrolytically lesioned with a new electrode to further confirm
recording site. The experimental
recording electrodes were calibrated to known dopamine standards using
a flow cell.
Electrophoretic Tissue Clearing
Following FSCV experiments,
a number of brain slices underwent CLARITY preparation, as described
by Chung and Diesseroth.[46,47] Slices were incubated
at 4 °C in hydrogel monomer solution (40% acrylamide, 0.25% VA-044,
4% PFA in PBS) for several days. Slices were polymerized at 37 °C
following nitrogen degassing. Polymerized slices were passively cleared
for 1 week in clearing buffer (200 mM boric acid, 4% SDS) at 37 °C.
Slices were then rinsed for 2 days in 0.1% Triton-PBS. For imaging,
slices were incubated in buffer (0.1% Triton X-100, 1 M sodium borate,
pH 8.5) plus the antibody of interest (1:500) for 2 days at 37 °C,
rinsed for 1 day in PBST, incubated with secondary antibody (1:100)
in PBST + 1 M sodium borate for 2 days then rinsed for 1 day. The
slices were transferred to 80% glycerol in water, which matches the
optical density of the clarified slice, and incubated for 1 day. The
slices were imaged with a NeuroLucida epifluorescent microscope (MicroBrightField).
Locomotor Sensitization
The day prior to the first
day of drug administration, animals were habituated to the locomotor
recording chamber. Male mice, 8–10 weeks old, were injected
intraperitoneally with either 2 mg/kg METH or an equivalent volume
of saline control for 7 days.[64] On day
14, all animals received 1 mg/kg METH intraperitoneally. Consecutive
beam breaks were recorded for 30 min following drug injection in a
chamber that measures infrared beam breaks (Photobeam Activity System,
San Diego Instruments). On day 15, mice were rapidly decapitated,
and FSCV recordings were taken to measure dopamine release in the
VP. Because voltammetry experiments are rate limiting, with a maximum
of recording from two animals in a day, drug administration was staggered
such that all animals received identical dosing regimens.
Drugs
Free-base corrected methamphetamine hydrochloride
(Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA) was prepared immediately before
injections. Nomifensine (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA) and idazoxan
(Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA) were made in DMSO at 10 mM then
serially diluted in aCSF to designated concentrations.
Statistical
Analysis
Unless otherwise noted, all data
are represented as means with standard error of the mean. Data were
analyzed by two-tailed t tests or ANOVA to determine
statistical significance. Statistical analysis was conducted using
GraphPad Prism 6 and significance defined as p <
0.05.
Authors: J McDaid; C E Tedford; A R Mackie; J E Dallimore; A L Mickiewicz; F Shen; J M Angle; T C Napier Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2006-06-08 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Amy R Dunn; Carlie A Hoffman; Kristen A Stout; Minagi Ozawa; Rohan K Dhamsania; Gary W Miller Journal: Brain Res Date: 2017-12-21 Impact factor: 3.252
Authors: Stephen V Mahler; Zachary D Brodnik; Brittney M Cox; William C Buchta; Brandon S Bentzley; Julian Quintanilla; Zackary A Cope; Edwin C Lin; Matthew D Riedy; Michael D Scofield; Justin Messinger; Christina M Ruiz; Arthur C Riegel; Rodrigo A España; Gary Aston-Jones Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2018-11-16 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: Rachel A Cliburn; Amy R Dunn; Kristen A Stout; Carlie A Hoffman; Kelly M Lohr; Alison I Bernstein; Emily J Winokur; James Burkett; Yvonne Schmitz; William M Caudle; Gary W Miller Journal: J Chem Neuroanat Date: 2016-11-09 Impact factor: 3.052
Authors: Rachel C Branco; James P Burkett; Carlie A Black; Emily Winokur; William Ellsworth; Rohan K Dhamsania; Kelly M Lohr; Jason P Schroeder; David Weinshenker; Tanja Jovanovic; Gary W Miller Journal: Genes Brain Behav Date: 2020-01-14 Impact factor: 3.449