4.7 Article

The functional divide for primary reinforcement of D-mphetamine lies between the medial and lateral ventral striatum: Is the division of the accumbens core, shell, and olfactory tubercle valid?

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
Volume 25, Issue 20, Pages 5061-5065

Publisher

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0892-05.2005

Keywords

reward; intracranial self-administration; psychomotor stimulants; nucleus accumbens; olfactory tubercle; reinforcing

Categories

Funding

  1. NIDA NIH HHS [Z01 DA000439-06] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

When projection analyses placed the nucleus accumbens and olfactory tubercle in the striatal system, functional links between these sites began to emerge. The accumbens has been implicated in the rewarding effects of psychomotor stimulants, whereas recent work suggests that the medial accumbens shell and medial olfactory tubercle mediate the rewarding effects of cocaine. Interestingly, anatomical evidence suggests that medial portions of the shell and tubercle receive afferents from common zones in a number of regions. Here, we report results suggesting that the current division of the ventral striatum into the accumbens core and shell and the olfactory tubercle does not reflect the functional organization for amphetamine reward. Rats quickly learned to self-administer D-amphetamine into the medial shell or medial tubercle, whereas they failed to learn to do so into the accumbens core, ventral shell, or lateral tubercle. Our results suggest that primary reinforcement of amphetamine is mediated via the medial portion of the ventral striatum. Thus, the medial shell and medial tubercle are more functionally related than the medial and ventral shell or the medial and lateral tubercle. The current core - shell tubercle scheme should be reconsidered in light of recent anatomical data and these functional findings.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available