Abstract

It is thought that discrete subregions of the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) regulate different aspects of appetitive behavior, however, physiological support for this hypothesis has been lacking. In the present study, we used multichannel single-unit recording to compare the response of neurons in the prelimbic (PL) and infralimbic (IL) subregions of the mPFC, in rats pressing a lever to obtain sucrose pellets on a variable interval schedule of reinforcement (VI-60). Approximately 25% of neurons in both structures exhibited prominent excitatory responses during rewarded, but not unrewarded, lever presses. The time courses of reward responses in PL and IL, however, were markedly different. Most PL neurons exhibited fast and transient responses at the delivery of sucrose pellets, whereas most IL neurons exhibited delayed and prolonged responses associated with the collection of earned sucrose pellets. We further examined the functional significance of reward responses in IL and PL with local pharmacological inactivation. IL inactivation significantly delayed the collection of earned sucrose pellets, whereas PL inactivation produced no discernible effects. These findings support the hypothesis that PL and IL signal distinct aspects of appetitive behavior, and suggest that IL signaling facilitates reward collection.

Highlights

  • The medial prefrontal cortex is thought to regulate appetitive behavior, by influencing the striatum [1,2]

  • The medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) consists of anatomically discrete subregions: the prelimbic (PL) and infralimbic (IL) cortices, which are thought to contribute to different aspects of appetitive behavior [3]

  • It is generally acknowledged that the mPFC plays a key role in modulating appetitive behaviors, the individual contributions of the PL and IL subregions have not been emphasized

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) is thought to regulate appetitive behavior, by influencing the striatum [1,2]. Lesioning PL causes appetitive behavior to become insensitive to devaluation, whereas lesioning IL causes appetitive behavior to maintain its sensitivity to devaluation, despite overtraining [4,5]. These findings have been interpreted as PL and IL contributing to goal-directed and habitual appetitive behaviors, respectively. It remains to be elucidated whether PL and IL signal distinct components of the instrumental task (e.g., lever pressing or reward anticipation, delivery, or collection)

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call