4.7 Article

Abundance Compensates Kinetics: Similar Effect of Dopamine Signals on D1 and D2 Receptor Populations

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
卷 40, 期 14, 页码 2868-2881

出版社

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1951-19.2019

关键词

basal ganglia; computational model; dopamine; motivation; receptor kinetics; reward

资金

  1. University of Sheffield
  2. EU H2020 Program as part of the Human Brain Project (HBP-SGA1) [720270]
  3. BrainLinks-BrainTools Cluster of Excellence - German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft) [EXC 1086]
  4. state of Baden-Wuerttemberg through bwHPC
  5. EU H2020 Program as part of the Human Brain Project (HBP-SGA2) [785907]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The neuromodulator dopamine plays a key role in motivation, reward-related learning, and normal motor function. The different affinity of striatal D1 and D2 dopamine receptor types has been argued to constrain the D1 and D2 signaling pathways to phasic and tonic dopamine signals, respectively. However, this view assumes that dopamine receptor kinetics are instantaneous so that the time courses of changes in dopamine concentration and changes in receptor occupation are basically identical. Here we developed a neurochemical model of dopamine receptor binding taking into account the different kinetics and abundance of D1 and D2 receptors in the striatum. Testing a large range of behaviorally-relevant dopamine signals, we found that the D1 and D2 dopamine receptor populations responded very similarly to tonic and phasic dopamine signals. Furthermore, because of slow unbinding rates, both receptor populations integrated dopamine signals over a timescale of minutes. Our model provides a description of how physiological dopamine signals translate into changes in dopamine receptor occupation in the striatum, and explains why dopamine ramps are an effective signal to occupy dopamine receptors. Overall, our model points to the importance of taking into account receptor kinetics for functional considerations of dopamine signaling.

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