Involvement of the basolateral complex and central nucleus of amygdala in the omission effects of different magnitudes of reinforcement

Evidence from appetitive Pavlovian and instrumental conditioning studies suggest that the amygdala is involved in modulation of responses correlated with motivational states, and therefore, to the modulation of processes probably underlying reinforcement omission effects. The present study aimed to clarify whether or not the mechanisms related to reinforcement omission effects of different magnitudes depend on basolateral complex and central nucleus of amygdala. Rats were trained on a fixed-interval 12 s with limited hold 6 s signaled schedule in which correct responses were always followed by one of two reinforcement magnitudes. Bilateral lesions of the basolateral complex and central nucleus were made after acquisition of stable performance. After postoperative recovery, the training was changed from 100% to 50% reinforcement schedules. The results showed that lesions of the basolateral complex and central nucleus did not eliminate or reduce, but interfere with reinforcement omission effects. The response from rats of both the basolateral complex and central nucleus lesioned group was higher relative to that of the rats of their respective sham-lesioned groups after reinforcement omission. Thus, the lesioned rats were more sensitive to the omission effect. Moreover, the basolateral complex lesions prevented the magnitude effect on reinforcement omission effects. Basolateral complex lesioned rats showed no differential performance following omission of larger and smaller reinforcement magnitude. Thus, the basolateral complex is involved in incentive processes relative to omission of different reinforcement magnitudes. Therefore, it is possible that reinforcement omission effects are modulated by brain circuitry which involves amygdala. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Cocaine effects on mouse incentive-learning and human addiction are linked to alpha 2 subunit-containing GABA(A) receptors

Because GABA(A) receptors containing alpha 2 subunits are highly represented in areas of the brain, such as nucleus accumbens (NAcc), frontal cortex, and amygdala, regions intimately involved in signaling motivation and reward, we hypothesized that manipulations of this receptor subtype would influence processing of rewards. Voltage-clamp recordings from NAcc medium spiny neurons of mice with alpha 2 gene deletion showed reduced synaptic GABA(A) receptor-mediated responses. Behaviorally, the deletion abolished cocaine`s ability to potentiate behaviors conditioned to rewards (conditioned reinforcement), and to support behavioral sensitization. In mice with a point mutation in the benzodiazepine binding pocket of alpha 2-GABA(A) receptors (alpha 2H101R), GABAergic neurotransmission in medium spiny neurons was identical to that of WT (i.e., the mutation was silent), but importantly, receptor function was now facilitated by the atypical benzodiazepine Ro 15-4513 (ethyl 8-amido-5,6-dihydro-5-methyl-6-oxo-4H-imidazo [1,5-a] [1,4] benzodiazepine-3-carboxylate). In alpha 2H101R, but not WT mice, Ro 15-4513 administered directly into the NAcc-stimulated locomotor activity, and when given systemically and repeatedly, induced behavioral sensitization. These data indicate that activation of alpha 2-GABA(A) receptors (most likely in NAcc) is both necessary and sufficient for behavioral sensitization. Consistent with a role of these receptors in addiction, we found specific markers and haplotypes of the GABRA2 gene to be associated with human cocaine addiction.

Effects of consequenses on patterns of interlocked contingencies; A replication of a metacontingency experiment

The concept of metacontingency was taught to undergraduate students of Psychology by using a "game" simulation proposed originally by Vichi, Andery and Glenn (2009). Twenty-five students, distributed into three groups were exposed to six experimental sessions in which they had to make bets and divide the amounts gained. The three groups competed against each other for photocopies quotas. Two contingencies shifted over the sessions. Under Contingency B, the group would win points only if in the previous round each member had received the same amount of points and under Contingency A, winning was contingent on an unequal distribution of the points. We observed that proportional divisions predominated independent of the contingency in course. The manipulation of cultural consequences (winning or losing points) produced consistent modifications in two response categories: 1) choices of the value bet in each round, and 2) divisions of the points among group members. Controlling relations between cultural consequences and the behavior of dividing were statistically significant in one of the groups, whereas in the other two groups controlling relations were observed only in Contingency B. A review of the reinforcement criteria used in the original experiment is suggested.

Role of the amygdala in the reinforcement omission effect

The reinforcement omission effect (ROE) has been attributed to both motivational and attentional consequences of surprising reinforcement omission. Recent evidence suggests that the basolateral complex of the amygdala is involved in motivational components related to reinforcement value, whereas the central nucleus of the amygdala is involved in the processing of the attentional consequences of surprise. This study was designed to verify whether the mechanisms involved in the ROE depend on the integrity of either the basolateral amygdala complex or central nucleus of the amygdala. The ROE was evaluated in rats with lesions of either the central nucleus or basolateral complex of the amygdala and trained on a fixed-interval schedule procedure (Experiment 1) and fixed-interval with limited hold signaled schedule procedure (Experiment 2). The results of Experiment 1 showed that sham-operated rats and rats with lesions of either the central nucleus or basolateral area displayed the ROE. In contrast, in Experiment 2, subjects with lesions of the central nucleus or basolateral complex of the amygdala exhibited a smaller ROE compared with sham-operated subjects. Thus, the effects of selective lesions of amygdala subregions on the ROE in rats depended on the training procedure. Furthermore, the absence of differences between the lesioned groups in either experiment did not allow the dissociation of attentional or motivational components of the ROE with functions of specific areas of the amygdala. Thus, results did not show a functional double-dissociation between the central nucleus and basolateral area in the ROE.