4.0 Review

Reward from bugs to bipeds: a comparative approach to understanding how reward circuits function

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROGENETICS
Volume 30, Issue 2, Pages 133-148

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/01677063.2016.1180385

Keywords

Behavior; dopamine; functional conservation; neuromodulators; neuropeptides; neurotransmitters

Funding

  1. Richard and Susan Smith Family Foundation, Newton, MA
  2. Brown Institute for Brain Science
  3. Center for Nervous System Function
  4. COBRE Project Leader Award [NIGMS P20GM103645]
  5. Rhode Island Foundation Medical Research Award [20144133]
  6. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF GENERAL MEDICAL SCIENCES [P20GM103645] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In a complex environment, animals learn from their responses to stimuli and events. Appropriate response to reward and punishment can promote survival, reproduction and increase evolutionary fitness. Interestingly, the neural processes underlying these responses are remarkably similar across phyla. In all species, dopamine is central to encoding reward and directing motivated behaviors, however, a comprehensive understanding of how circuits encode reward and direct motivated behaviors is still lacking. In part, this is a result of the sheer diversity of neurons, the heterogeneity of their responses and the complexity of neural circuits within which they are found. We argue that general features of reward circuitry are common across model organisms, and thus principles learned from invertebrate model organisms can inform research across species. In particular, we discuss circuit motifs that appear to be functionally equivalent from flies to primates. We argue that a comparative approach to studying and understanding reward circuit function provides a more comprehensive understanding of reward circuitry, and informs disorders that affect the brain's reward circuitry.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available