4.7 Article

Prelimbic Cortical Neurons Track Preferred Reward Value and Reflect Impulsive Choice during Delay Discounting Behavior

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
卷 39, 期 16, 页码 3108-3118

出版社

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2532-18.2019

关键词

accumbens; behavior; decision making; impulsivity; prefrontal; prelimbic

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [DA034021, T32 DA007244, F31 DA042721-01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In delay discounting, individuals discount the value of a reward based on the delay to its receipt. The prelimbic cortex (PrL) is heavily interconnected with several brain regions implicated in delay discounting, but the specific contributions of the PrL to delay discounting are unknown. Here, we used multineuron electrophysiological recording methods in Long-Evans male (n = 10) and female (n = 9) rats to characterize the firing dynamics of PrL neurons during discrete cue and lever press events in a delay discounting task. Rats' initial preference for the large reward decreased as delays for that outcome increased across blocks, reflecting classic discounting behavior. Electrophysiological recordings revealed that subgroups of neurons exhibited phasic responses to cue presentations and lever presses. These phasic neurons were found to respond to either large/delay, small/immediate, or both trial types and the percentage of these neurons shifted across blocks as the expected value of the reward changed. Critically, this shift was only seen during trials in which animals could choose their preferred option (free choice trials) and not during trials where animals could choose only one option (forced choice trials). Further, this shift was dependent on rats' inherent impulsivity because high impulsive rats demonstrated a greater percentage of small/immediate-responsive neurons as the task progressed. Collectively, these fmdings suggest a unique role for the PrL in encoding reward value during delay discounting that is influenced by individual differences in impulsivity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据