Biology subjects

Uhrig, A.

Publications and source records attributed to Uhrig, A..

2 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2022

Does vendor breeding colony influence sign- and goal-tracking in Pavlovian conditioned approach? A preregistered empirical replication

Vendor differences are thought to affect Pavlovian conditioning in rats. After observing possible differences in sign-tracking and goal-tracking behaviour with rats from different breeding colonies, we performed an empirical replication of the effect. 40 male Long-Evans rats from Charles River colonies K72 and R06 received 11 Pavlovian conditioned approach training sessions (or "autoshaping"), with a lever as the conditioned stimulus (CS) and 10% sucrose as the unconditioned stimulus (US). Each 58-min session consisted of 12 CS-US trials. Paired rats (n = 15/colony) received the US following lever retraction. Unpaired control rats (n = 5/colony) received sucrose during the inter-trial interval. Next, we evaluated the conditioned reinforcing properties of the CS, by determining whether rats would learn to nose-poke into a new, active (vs. inactive) port to receive CS presentations alone (no sucrose). Preregistered confirmatory analyses showed that during autoshaping sessions, Paired rats made significantly more CS-triggered entries into the sucrose port (i.e., goal-tracking) and lever activations (sign-tracking) than Unpaired rats did, demonstrating acquisition of the CS-US association. Confirmatory analyses showed no effects of breeding colony on autoshaping. During conditioned reinforcement testing, analysis of data from Paired rats alone showed significantly more active vs. inactive nosepokes, suggesting that in these rats, the lever CS acquired incentive motivational properties. Analysing Paired rats alone also showed that K72 rats had higher Pavlovian Conditioned Approach scores than R06 rats did. Thus, breeding colony can affect outcome in Pavlovian conditioned approach studies, and animal breeding source should be considered as a covariate in such work.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2019

Effects of dopamine receptor antagonism and amphetamine sensitization on sign- and goal-tracking after extended training

The dopamine system is important for incentive salience attribution, where motivational value is assigned to conditioned cues that predict appetitive reinforcers. However, the role of dopamine in this process may change with extended training. We tested the effects of dopamine D1-like and D2-like receptor antagonism on the expression of sign-tracking and goal-tracking conditioned responses following extended Pavlovian conditioned approach (PCA) training. We also tested if amphetamine-induced psychomotor sensitization accelerates the enhanced acquisition of sign-tracking that is observed with extended training. In experiment 1, 24 male Long-Evans rats received 20 PCA sessions in which one lever (CS+, 10 s) predicted 0.2 mL sucrose (10%, w/v) delivery and the other lever (CS-) did not. SCH-23390 (D1-like antagonist) or eticlopride (D2-like antagonist) were administered before non-reinforced behavioural tests at doses of 0, 0.01, and 0.1 mg/kg (s.c.). In experiment 2, rats received vehicle or 2 mg/kg amphetamine (i.p.) for 7 days (n = 12/group). Ten days later, they received 16 PCA training sessions. Both doses of SCH-23390 reduced sign- and goal-tracking, but also reduced locomotor behaviour. A low dose of eticlopride (0.01 mg/kg) selectively reduced goal-tracking, without affecting sign-tracking or locomotor behaviour. Amphetamine produced psychomotor sensitization, and this did not affect the acquisition of sign- or goal-tracking. Following extended PCA training, dopamine D2-like receptor activity is required for the expression of goal-tracking but not sign-tracking. Psychomotor sensitization to amphetamine did not impact incentive salience attribution; however, more selective manipulations of the dopamine system may be needed.

neuroscience↗