4.7 Article

Instrumental aversion coding in the basolateral amygdala and its reversion by a benzodiazepine

期刊

NEUROPSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY
卷 47, 期 6, 页码 1199-1209

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41386-021-01176-2

关键词

-

资金

  1. Australian Research Council [DP190100482]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Punishment learning relies on aversion-coding of instrumental responses in the basolateral amygdala (BLA), with benzodiazepines mitigating punishment effects by reversing the aversion coding in BLA.
Punishment involves learning the relationship between actions and their adverse consequences. Both the acquisition and expression of punishment learning depend on the basolateral amygdala (BLA), but how BLA supports punishment remains poorly understood. To address this, we measured calcium (Ca2+) transients in BLA principal neurons during punishment. Male rats were trained to press two individually presented levers for food; when one of these levers also yielded aversive footshock, responding on this punished lever decreased relative to the other, unpunished lever. In rats with the Ca2+ indicator GCaMP6f targeted to BLA principal neurons, we observed excitatory activity transients to the footshock punisher and inhibitory transients to lever-presses earning a reward. Critically, as rats learned punishment, activity around the punished response transformed from inhibitory to excitatory and similarity analyses showed that these punished lever-press transients resembled BLA transients to the punisher itself. Systemically administered benzodiazepine (midazolam) selectively alleviated punishment. Moreover, the degree to which midazolam alleviated punishment was associated with how much punished response-related BLA transients reverted to their pre-punishment state. Together, these findings show that punishment learning is supported by aversion-coding of instrumental responses in the BLA and that the anti-punishment effects of benzodiazepines are associated with a reversion of this aversion coding.

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